11/3/14

From Jim McGuiggian... God is sovereign


God is sovereign

The presence of sorrow, oppression and injustice in the world does not deny the sovereignty of God. These things will keep us from using a model of sovereignty that doesn't fit the facts but in the end, whatever model or models we use, it is senseless to deny God's reign over the creation.

Jeremiah 31:15-17 says this. This is what the Lord says: "A voice heard in Ramah, mourning and great weeping, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because her children are no more." This is what the Lord says: "Restrain your voice from weeping and your eyes from tears, for your work will be rewarded," declares the Lord. "They will return from the land of the enemy. So there is hope for your future," declares the Lord. "Your children will return to their own land."

Ramah was a deportation centre where the conqueror gathered the captives together before scattering them throughout the world. [How many places on earth are there that are remembered (if at all) as places of despair and heartbreak? Ramah was one.] Rachel, the mother of Israel, weeps as she sees her children sent off into the grave of exile. There’s the reality, the cruel conqueror, unstoppable, his legions too powerful to defeat and using cunning organisation and long term plans for the fragmentation and permanent humiliation of the conquered. Imagine the searing pain of physical brutality and emotional rupturing. Imagine the horror on children’s faces, the panic written all over parents, the despair of husbands and wives that have never spent a single night apart from each other.

Then the prophet speaks the promise above. "It doesn’t end this way! Better days are ahead. The Lord (Yahweh) who brought us out of Egypt says that all this misery and misfortune will be reversed. The future is secure because Yahweh says so!"

Yes, but in the meantime—what about in the meantime? Well...the present must be faced and the heartbreak borne.

But is that not asking too much? Apparently not since he tells them not to cry. But when he tells them not to cry he isn’t snarling at them, mark you. That’s not his tone! But whatever his tone, the word is still the same, "Don’t cry, this is not the end and I have a glorious future in store for you." So in light of the future they are to live hopefully in a tough present (compare 1 Corinthians 15:58, spoken in light of the death of death—note the "therefore").

But the assured promise of a glorious future says something about a tough present! He that controls the future is the Lord of the present. Look at the crushing present and hear the prophet say that the future is secure and glorious. The economic chaos, the inoperable tumours, the rapacious governments, the genocide, the trashed marriages, the war-mongers, the predatory multinational companies that are burying little nations in cunning purchases and loans—look at these and hear the prophetic promise. The promise defies the devastating present. The Lord of the future is working his strange work even in that kind of present. The challenge is to trust him. Is he able and is he willing? Does he wring his hands in despair at the sight of people like Asshurbanipal or Nebuchadnezzar or Stalin or Hitler? [Add the names you think belong on such a list and the question remains the same.]

He must see what we see but he must see more. If he is shaping the future he must be sovereign over the present. It is a good thing, a critically important thing for us to look to the promised glory. But faith’s power and the maximum of peace in the middle of the political, economic, military, social and moral storms is to be able to look at all these and believe that God is in the midst of them bringing about a new world. [And if God is bringing about a world of righteousness it is the destiny of the People of God to live such a life in the present and in doing that to bear witness to God's purpose.]

A prophetic promise not only envisions the future it undermines the lies that a cruel and unbending present pours out. A prophetic promise defies all the claims that the world powers make and joins its voice with Paul in Colossians 2:15.

Believe!

Objections to God's Plan of Salvation Considered by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1332

Objections to God's Plan of Salvation Considered

by  Bert Thompson, Ph.D.

When the topic of salvation is discussed, it is not unusual to hear certain objections to God’s designated plan. At times, such objections result from a misunderstanding of the steps involved in the salvation process, or the reason(s) for those steps. On occasion, however, the objections result from a stubborn refusal to acquiesce to God’s commands regarding what constitutes salvation. I would like to consider three such objections here.

IS SALVATION THE RESULT OF
“BAPTISMAL REGENERATION”?

Is the forgiveness of sins that results from being baptized due to some special power within the water? No. “Baptismal regeneration” is the idea that there is a miraculous power in the water that produces salvation (i.e., regeneration). As Wayne Jackson has noted: “…the notion that baptism is a ‘sacrament’ which has a sort of mysterious, innate power to remove the contamination of sin—independent of personal faith and a volitional submission to God’s plan of redemption”—is plainly at odds with biblical teaching (1997, 32:45). An examination of the Old Testament (which serves as our “tutor” [Galatians 3:24), and which contains things “for our learning” [Romans 15:4]) provides important instruction regarding this principle. When Naaman the leper was told by Elisha to dip seven times in the Jordan River, at first he refused, but eventually obeyed—and was healed. However, there was no meritorious power in the muddy waters of the Jordan. Naaman was healed because He did exactly what God commanded him to do, in exactly the way God commanded him to do it.
This was true of the Israelites’ salvation as well. On one occasion when they sinned, and God began to slay them for their unrighteousness, those who wished to repent and be spared were commanded to look upon a brass serpent on a pole in the midst of the camp (Numbers 21:1-9). There was no meritorious power in the serpent. Rather, the Israelites were saved from destruction because they did exactly what God commanded them to do, in exactly the way God commanded them to do it.
The New Testament presents the same principle. Jesus once encountered a man born blind (John 9). Then Lord spat on the ground, made a spittle/clay potion, and placed it over the man’s eyes. He then instructed the man to “go, wash in the pool of Siloam” (John 9:7). Was there medicinal power in Siloam’s waters? No. It was the man’s obedient faith that produced the end-result, not some miraculous power in the water. What would have happened if the man had refused to obey Christ, or had altered the Lord’s command? Suppose the man had reasoned: “If I wash in Siloam, some may think I am trusting in the water to be healed. Others may think that I am attempting to perform some kind of ‘work’ to ‘merit’ regaining my sight. Therefore I simply will ‘have faith in’ Christ, but I will not dip in the pool of Siloam.” Would the man have been healed? Most certainly not! What if Noah, during the construction of the ark, had followed God’s instructions to the letter, except for the fact that he decided to build the ark out of a material other than the gopher wood that God had commanded? Would Noah and his family have been saved? Most certainly not! Noah would have been guilty of violating God’s commandments, since he had not done exactly as God commanded him. Did not Jesus Himself say: “If ye love me, ye will keep My commandments” (John 14:15, emp. added)?
Peter used the case of Noah to discuss the relationship of baptism to salvation. He stated unequivocally that baptism is involved in salvation when he noted that, just as Noah and his family were transported from a polluted environment of corruption into a realm of deliverance, so in baptism we are moved from the polluted environment of defilement into a realm of redemption. It is by baptism that one enters “into Christ” (Romans 6:4; Galatians 3:27), wherein salvation is found (2 Timothy 2:10). In Ephesians 5:26 and Titus 3:5, Paul described baptism as a “washing of water” or a “washing of regeneration” wherein the sinner is “cleansed” or “saved.” [Baptist theologian A.T. Robertson admitted that both of these passages refer specifically to water baptism (1931, 4:607).] The power of baptism to remove sin lies not in the water, but in the God Who commanded the sinner to be baptized in the first place.

IS BAPTISM A HUMAN WORK?

Is baptism a meritorious human work? No. But is it required for a person to be saved? Yes. How is this possible? The Bible clearly teaches that we are not saved by works (Titus 3:4-7; Ephesians 2:9). Yet the Bible clearly teaches we are saved by works (James 2:14-24). Since inspiration guarantees that the Scriptures never will contradict themselves, it is obvious that two different kinds of works are under consideration in these passages.
The New Testament mentions at least four kinds of works: (1) works of the Law of Moses (Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:20); (2) works of the flesh (Galatians 5:19-21); (3) works of merit (Titus 3:4-7); and (4) works resulting from obedience of faith (James 2:14-24). This last category often is referred to as “works of God.” This phrase does not mean works performed by God; rather, the intent is “works required and approved by God” (Thayer, 1958, p. 248; cf. Jackson, 1997, 32:47). Consider the following example from Jesus’ statements in John 6:27-29:
Work not for the food which perisheth, but for the food which abideth unto eternal life.... They said therefore unto him, What must we do, that we may work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
Within this context, Christ made it clear that there are works which humans must do to receive eternal life. Moreover, the passage affirms that believing itself is a work (“This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.”). It therefore follows that if one is saved without any type of works, then he is saved without faith, because faith is a work. Such a conclusion would throw the Bible into hopeless confusion!
In addition, it should be noted that repentance from sin is a divinely appointed work for man to perform prior to his reception of salvation. The people of ancient Nineveh “repented” at Jonah’s preaching (Matthew 12:41), yet the Old Testament record relates that “God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way” (Jonah 3:10). Thus, if one can be saved without any kind of works, he can be saved without repentance. Yet Jesus Himself declared that without repentance, one will surely perish (Luke 13:3,5).
But what about baptism? The New Testament specifically excludes baptism from the class of human meritorious works unrelated to redemption. The context of Titus 3:4-7 reveals the following information. (1) We are not saved by works of righteousness that we do by ourselves (i.e., according to any plan or course of action that we devised—see Thayer, p. 526). (2) We are saved by the “washing of regeneration” (i.e., baptism), exactly as 1 Peter 3:21 states. (3) Thus, baptism is excluded from all works of human righteousness that men contrive, but is itself a “work of God” (i.e., required and approved by God) necessary for salvation. When one is raised from the watery grave of baptism, it is according to the “working of God” (Colossians 2:12), and not any man-made plan. No one can suggest (justifiably) that baptism is a meritorious work of human design. When we are baptized, we are completely passive, and thus hardly can have performed any kind of “work.” Instead, we have obeyed God through saving faith. Our “works of God” were belief, repentance, confession, and baptism—all commanded by the Scriptures of one who would receive salvation as the free gift of God (Romans 6:23).

IS THE BAPTISM ASSOCIATED WITH
SALVATION HOLY SPIRIT BAPTISM?

To circumvent the connection between water baptism and salvation, some have suggested that the baptism discussed in passages such as Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, and 1 Peter 3:21 is Holy Spirit baptism. But such a position cannot be correct. Christ commanded His followers—after His death and ascension—to go into all the world and “make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:18-20). That same command applies no less to Christians today.
During the early parts of the first century, we know there was more than one baptism in existence (e.g., John’s baptism, Holy Spirit baptism, Christ’s baptism, etc.). But by the time Paul wrote his epistle to the Christians in Ephesus, only one of those baptisms remained. He stated specifically in Ephesians 4:4-5: “There is one body, and one Spirit, even as also ye were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism.” Which one baptism remained? One thing we know for certain: Christ never would give His disciples a command that they could not carry out.
The Scriptures, however, teach that Jesus administers baptism of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:11; Luke 3:15-17). Yet Christians were commanded to baptize those whom they taught, and who believed (John 3:16), repented of their sins (Luke 13:3), and confessed Christ as the Son of God (Matthew 10:32). It is clear, then, that the baptism commanded by Christ was not Holy Spirit baptism. If it were, Christ would be put in the untenable position of having commanded His disciples to do something they could not do—baptize in the Holy Spirit. However, they could baptize in water, which is exactly what they did. And that is exactly what we still are doing today. Baptism in the Holy Spirit no longer is available; only water baptism remains, and is the one true baptism commanded by Christ for salvation (Ephesians 4:4-5; Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38).
When a person does precisely what the Lord has commanded, he has not “merited” or “earned” salvation. Rather, his obedience is evidence of his faith (James 2:18). Are we saved by God’s grace? Indeed we are (Ephesians 2:8-9). But the fact that we are saved by grace does not negate human responsibility in obeying God’s commands. Every person who wishes to be saved must exhibit the “obedience of faith” commanded within God’s Word (Romans 1:5; 16:26). A part of that obedience is adhering to God’s command to be baptized.

REFERENCES

Jackson, Wayne (1997), “The Matter of ‘Baptismal Regeneration,’ ” Christian Courier, 32:45-46, April.
Jackson, Wayne (1997), “The Role of ‘Works’ in the Plan of Salvation,” Christian Courier, 32:47, April.
Robertson, A.T. (1931), Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville, TN: Broadman).
Thayer, J.H. (1958 reprint), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark).

From Mark Copeland... Responding To Evil (Matthew 5:38-42)

                        "THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

                      Responding To Evil (5:38-42)

INTRODUCTION

1. When someone treats you wrong, how do you respond?
   a. Do you react in kind, treating evil with evil?
   b. Do you just stand there and take whatever abuse is given?
   -- What is the proper way to respond to evil?

2. In His sermon on the mount, Jesus taught concerning the
   righteousness of the kingdom...
   a. He did so by contrasting it with the righteousness of the scribes
      and Pharisees
      1) Noting how the Law had often been interpreted and applied
      2) Declaring what He expected of His disciples
   b. We have seen Jesus contrast this righteousness in such matters
      as:
      1) Murder and anger - Mt 5:21-26
      2) Adultery - Mt 5:27-30
      3) Divorce - Mt 5:31-32
      4) Swearing Oaths - Mt 5:33-37

[In this lesson, we shall look at what Jesus taught concerning
"vengeance" (Mt 5:38-42) as we discuss "Responding To Evil".  First,
let's compare...]

I. THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TRADITIONAL INTERPRETATION

   A. CONCERNING "AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH"...
      1. It is found in Exo 21:24-25
      2. A parallel passage is Deut 19:21

   B. THESE STATEMENTS WERE LAWS FOR CIVIL COURTS TO APPLY...
      1. Notice carefully Deut 19:15-21; Exo 21:22-23
      2. They were given to guide the priests in meriting out proper
         punishment

   C. WHAT THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES HAD DONE...
      1. Interpreted these statements so as to justify personal
         retribution!
      2. Applied them by frequently taking matters of revenge into
         their own hands
      -- Just as many people do today!

   D. THE LAW REPEATEDLY FORBAD "PERSONAL" VENGEANCE...
      1. Consider Lev 19:18; Pr 20:22; 24:29
      2. In both Old Testament and New Testaments, the matter of
         vengeance was to be left up to God and His duly appointed
         agent:  civil government! - cf. Ro 12:19; 13:1-4

[There really is no difference between the Law and what we find in the
New Testament in this regard:  Personal vengeance has no place in the
lives of those who are the children of God!

Now let's examine more closely...]

II. THE PROPER RESPONSE TO EVIL

   A. JESUS PROCLAIMED TWO PRINCIPLES...
      1. Do not resist an evil person (39a)
         a. Not only should you not take vengeance into your own
            hands...
         b. But don't even oppose (resist) the evil person when the
            evil is being done!
      2. Respond to evil by doing good! (39b-42)
         a. Jesus illustrates this principle with several examples...
            1) Responding to physical abuse  (39b)
               a) "Turn the other cheek"
               b) This may refer to offering the other cheek as an
                  expression of love
            2) Responding to a civil suit, by giving more than what the
               person is suing! (40)
            3) Responding to government oppression, by offering to do
               more than what is being demanded of you! (41)
            4) Responding to those asking for help, by giving them what
               they ask! (42)
         b. In each case, the principle is the same
            1) We are not to resist the person...
               a) Who would mistreat us
               b) Who would try to deprive us of our possessions
            2) Instead, respond in a positive manner...
               a) Demonstrate love towards them
               b) Do so by freely giving them more than they were
                  hoping to gain by force, oppression, or manipulation!

   B. IS THIS TO BE TAKEN LITERALLY?
      1. Why not?
         a. We have several O.T. examples...
            1) Joseph, in forgiving his brothers - Gen 45:4-15
            2) David, in sparing the life of Saul - 1Sa 24:8-15
            3) Elisha, in feeding the army of the Arameans - 2Ki 6:
               8-23
         b. We also have several N.T. examples...
            1) Jesus, our prime example - 1Pe 2:20-23
            2) Stephen, when he was being stoned - Ac 7:59-60
            3) The Hebrew Christians, who "joyfully accepted" the
               plundering of their goods - He 10:32-34
         c. We have the clear teaching of Paul in Ro 12:19-21...
            1) We are not to avenge ourselves
            2) We must seek to overcome evil with good
      2. If not, then how do we apply these words of Jesus?
         a. What does Jesus mean?
         b. Give some examples of how to apply these teachings... ???

   C. ARE WE TO APPLY IT "UNCONDITIONALLY"?
      1. I.e., must we decide who is "worthy" to receive this kind of
         treatment?
         a. Jesus does not give us any indication that we are to use
            "discretion"
         b. Paul does give some qualifying instructions (e.g., 2 Th 3:10)...
            1) But it applies to those who are Christians
            2) And we have a responsibility to "judge" those in the
               church, leaving those outside to God - 1Co 5:9-13
      2. I do find striking the attitude of Christians in the second
         century, A.D.:
         a. "Do good, and give liberally to all who are in need from
            the wages God gives you. Do not hesitate about to whom you
            should not give. Give to all. For God wishes gifts to be
            made to all out of His bounties." (Hermas, 135 A.D.)
         b. "And he said to love not only our neighbors but also our
            enemies, and to be givers and sharers not only with the
            good but also to be liberal givers towards those who take
            away our possessions." (Irenaeus, 185 A.D.)
         c. "Do not judge those who is worthy and who is unworthy, for
            it is possible for you to be mistaken in your opinion. In
            the uncertainty of ignorance it is better to do good to the
            unworthy for the sake of the worthy, than by guarding
            against those who are less good not to encounter the good.
            For by sparing and trying to test those who are
            well-deserving or not, it is possible for you to neglect
            some who are loved by God, the penalty for which is the
            eternal punishment of fire. But by helping all those in
            need in turn you must assuredly find some who are able to
            save you before God." (Clement of Alexandria, 190 A.D.)
         -- These statements were written at a time when Christians
            were constantly mistreated, abused, and manipulated by
            others!
      3. The teachings of Jesus in this passage are admittedly
         challenging...
         a. It is opposed to what we might call "human nature"
         b. But we are called upon to be "partakers of the divine
            nature" (2Pe 1:4); in other words, to be more like God
            than men
      4. As we will see in the next lesson, it is in order to be truly
         "sons of your Father in heaven" that Jesus teaches a standard
         of righteousness that far exceeds...
         a. That of the scribes and Pharisees
         b. That of most people today!
      5. At the very least, let us expend as much energy...
         a. In seeing how we can apply this passage to lives...
         b. ...as many do trying to explain how it doesn't really mean
            what it appears to say!

CONCLUSION

1. Summarizing the teaching of Jesus concerning "Responding To Evil"...
   a. We are not to resist evil
   b. We are to respond by doing good in turn

2. We may never face the exact situations Jesus used to illustrate His
   point...
   a. But the principles can be applied to so many things we do face
   b. E.g., how people treat us at work, in our communities, in our own
      families, in the church

Whenever mistreated, take the challenge to see how you might overcome
evil with good.  Then your "righteousness" will exceed that of the
scribes and Pharisees!

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

From Mark Copeland... The Swearing Of Oaths (Matthew 5:33-37)

                        "THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

                    The Swearing Of Oaths (5:33-37)

INTRODUCTION

1. Are you a man or woman of your word?
   a. When you say "yes" or "no", do people take it as "gospel" (i.e., 
      truth)?
   b. Are you someone whose word is questioned, unless confirmed with
      an oath?

2. In His sermon on the mount, Jesus dealt with the issue of swearing 
   oaths...
   a. In which He set a high standard for His disciples to follow
   b. A standard that exceeded that of the scribes and Pharisees, and
      exceeds the standard followed by many people today

3. In this lesson, "The Swearing Of Oaths", we shall consider what
   Jesus taught from the viewpoint of four questions:
   a. What did the Law of Moses actually teach concerning the swearing
      of oaths?
   b. How had the Jews, and in particular the Scribes and Pharisees,
      traditionally interpreted and applied the Law?
   c. What did Jesus teach in response to this abuse of the Law 
      concerning oaths?
   d. Did Jesus forbid even those oaths made in court?

[To answer the first question, "What did the Law of Moses actually
teach concerning the swearing of oaths?", let's take a moment to 
consider...]

I. THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE SWEARING OF OATHS

   A. THREE PASSAGES MAKE VERY CLEAR THE TEACHING OF THE LAW...
      1. "And you shall not swear by My name falsely, nor shall you 
         profane the name of your God; I am the LORD." - Lev 19:12
      2. "If a man vows a vow to the LORD, or swears an oath to bind
         himself by some agreement, he shall not break his word; he 
         shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth." 
         - Num 30:2
      3. "When you make a vow to the LORD your God, you shall not delay
         to pay it; for the LORD your God will surely require it of 
         you, and it would be sin to you." - Deut 23:21

   B. THE EMPHASIS WAS ON TRUTHFULNESS AND FAITHFULNESS...
      1. A person must be truthful when he swears an oath; he must
         truly mean it
      2. He must also be faithful in keeping the oath; he must carry
         out his word

   C. THIS EMPHASIS ON TRUTHFULNESS "IN THE HEART" WAS STRESSED BY THE
      PSALMS AND PROPHETS AS WELL...
      1. In the Psalms - Ps 15:1-2; 24:3-4
      2. The Prophets often bemoaned the lack of truth in the heart 
         - Jer 5:1-2; Hos 4:1-2

[So the teaching of the Law was clear: Vows to the Lord should be kept,
and truthfulness in all things was expected.

This leads to our second question: "How had the Jews, and in particular
the Scribes and Pharisees, traditionally interpreted and applied the 
Law?"]

II. THE TRADITIONAL INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION

   A. IT APPEARS THE EMPHASIS HAD SHIFTED...
      1. FROM truthfulness in all things
      2. TO honoring only those vows sworn "to the Lord"
      -- As implied by Jesus comments in Mt 5:34-36

   B. IN APPLICATION, ONLY VOWS "TO THE LORD" WERE BINDING...
      1. That the Jews had made such arbitrary distinctions between
         their vows is seen in Mt 23:16-19
      2. Because of this distinction, daily conversations were often
         spiced with meaningless oaths to make impressions; e.g.,:
         a. "I swear by heaven"
         b. "I swear by the throne of God"
         c. "I swear...by the earth...by Jerusalem...by the altar...by
            the temple...by my head..."

[By shifting the emphasis from truthfulness to honoring only those vows
made to the Lord, the Pharisees in their application of the Law 
justified the use of meaningless vows.

Now to our third question: "What did Jesus teach in response to this
abuse of the Law concerning oaths?"]

III. THE TEACHING OF JESUS

   A. HE EXPOSED THE HYPOCRISY IN SUCH ARBITRARY DISTINCTIONS...
      1. Mt 23:20-22 clearly shows that when one swears by...
         a. "the temple"
         b. "the throne of God"
         ...he is swearing by the LORD also!
      2. Mt 5:34-36 likewise teaches that one cannot swear by these
         things without involving God
         a. Heaven is the throne of God
         b. Earth is His footstool
         c. Only God can change our hair color (without the use of
            dyes)
      -- Therefore, any oath is an oath "to the Lord"!

   B. HE ENJOINED "TRUTHFULNESS IN THE HEART"...
      1. Let your "yes" mean "yes"
      2. Let your "no" mean "no"
      -- Any more than this is evil, and would be contrary to speaking
         "truth in his heart" (Ps 15:1-2)

[In exposing the hypocritical distinctions made by the scribes and 
Pharisees in their oaths, and in commanding us to speak simply and 
truthfully, the words of Jesus have led many to ask our fourth and 
final question: "Did Jesus forbid even those oaths made in court?"]

IV. MAKING OATHS IN JUDICIAL MATTERS

   A. ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF SWEARING JUDICIAL OATHS...
      1. Both Jesus and James qualified their statements concerning 
         oaths
         a. Mt 5:34ff - "swear not at all" is immediately qualified by
            Jesus to refer to flippant and hypocritical oaths commonly
            voiced by the people
         b. Jm 5:12 - the command "do not swear" is also qualified by
            James to refer to the same kind of meaningless oaths
      2. Also, consider the following points:
         a. God has sworn an oath to us - He 6:16-18
         b. Jesus was willing to answer under oath before the Sanhedrin
            court - Mt 26:63-64
         c. Paul made solemn oaths in his epistles - 2Co 1:23; Ga 1:20
         d. An angel of God swore an oath - Re 10:5-7

   B. IN LIGHT OF THESE ARGUMENTS...
      1. Some understand Jesus and James to condemn only the flippant,
         profane and hypocritical oaths...
         a. Used to make impressions
         b. Used to spice daily conversations
         ...but were never intended to be kept
      2. Therefore the EXCEPTION to not swearing oaths can be:
         a. Solemn oaths made in judicial circumstances
         b. Those oaths on occasions of solemn religious importance (as
            in the case of Paul)

   C. I PREFER TO TAKE THE "SAFE" COURSE...
      1. In other words, to "swear not at all"
      2. Fortunately, in this country we are allowed the option to 
         "confidently affirm"
      -- But I would not judge brethren who themselves solemnly and 
         honestly "swear oaths" in judicial circumstances

CONCLUSION

1. The righteousness of the kingdom is to exceed that of the scribes 
   and Pharisees...
   a. They would often spice their statements with vows and oaths in
      order to be believed...
   b. Christians are to be so truthful, their "yes" means "yes" and 
      their "no" means "no"
   -- So truthful and trustworthy are the disciples of Christ to be, it
      would not be necessary for them to swear oaths or have to say "I 
      promise" in order to be trusted

2. Can this be said of us, when people know that we are Christians?
   a. Can others "bank" on our words?
   b. When we say we will do something, is it as good as done?

May the words of our Lord remind us that even our speech reflects 
either honor or dishonor upon the God we serve!

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

From Mark Copeland... The Treachery Of Divorce (Matthew 5:31-32)

                        "THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

                   The Treachery Of Divorce (5:31-32)

INTRODUCTION

1. We live in an age of easy divorce...
   a. Many if not all states have "no-fault" divorce laws
   b. In some cases, all it takes is for one person to decide to have a
      divorce, and their spouse can do nothing to prevent it

2. What does God think about divorce?
   a. What was His view of divorce in the Old Testament?
   b. What does He think of it now?

3. In His sermon on the mount, Jesus addressed the issue of divorce...
   a. As He taught His disciples concerning the righteousness of the 
      kingdom
   b. In which He described the effects of divorcing one's spouse

[In this lesson, "The Treachery Of Divorce", we shall use Mt 5:31-32 as
our text.  To understand Jesus' comments in their context, let's first
determine what was...]

I. THE "TRADITIONAL" INTERPRETATION

   A. "WHOEVER DIVORCES HIS WIFE, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF
      DIVORCE" - Mt 5:31
      1. This was the "traditional" interpretation of Deut 24:1-4;
         handed down orally
      2. In applying the Law, they had focused on the idea of giving
         certificates of divorce
      3. They concluded divorce was permissible as long as a 
         certificate of divorce was given

   B. IS THIS WHAT THE LAW ACTUALLY SAID?
      1. Please read Deut 24:1-4 carefully...
         a. Verses 1-3 simply describe a particular situation
            1) WHEN a man is displeased with his wife and gives her a
               certificate a divorce and sends her out of the house...
            2) WHEN she has left and becomes another man's wife...
            3) IF her second husband detests her and gives her a bill
               of divorcement and sends her out of his house, or if the
               second husband dies...
         b. It is in verse 4 that Moses actually commands what must not
            be done
            1) Which was: "her former husband who divorced her must not
               take her back to be his wife after she has been defiled;
               for that is an abomination to the Lord"
            2) This passage is simply forbidding a man to remarry his
               wife after she had been married to another - cf. Jer 3:1
      2. Note also Paul's understanding of the Law - cf. Ro 7:1-3
         a. A woman was bound by the Law to her husband as long he
            lived
         b. If she married another while her first husband was still
            living (implying a certificate of divorce was given), she
            became an adulteress (i.e., defiled)!

[So the scribes and Pharisees had interpreted the Law to permit divorce
as long as a certificate of divorce was given to the wife.  We have 
tried to point out that was not the case.  What does Jesus say?]

II. JESUS' INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION

   A. "WHOEVER DIVORCES HIS WIFE FOR ANY REASON EXCEPT SEXUAL
      IMMORALITY CAUSES HER TO COMMIT ADULTERY" - Mt 5:32
      1. The only acceptable grounds for divorcing a wife is SEXUAL 
         IMMORALITY
      2. Otherwise, divorcing a wife "causes her to commit adultery"
      3. How?  By placing her in a position where she is likely to 
         remarry, in which she becomes an adulteress
      4. This is what the Law implied in Deut 24:4 and Jer 3:1
         a. That is why the first husband couldn't take her back
         b. Even if her second husband had died!
         c. Because the wife had become "defiled"!
      5. Notice these comments by KEIL & DELITZSCH...

         "The second marriage of a woman who had been divorced is
         designated by Moses a defilement of the woman...a moral
         defilement, i.e., blemishing, desecration of the sexual
         communion which was sanctified by marriage, IN THE SAME SENSE
         IN WHICH ADULTERY IS CALLED A DEFILEMENT in Lev 18:20 and Num 5:13,14..."

         "Thus the second marriage of a divorced woman was placed
         implicit upon a par with adultery, and some approach was made
         towards the teaching of Christ concerning marriage (Mt 5:32)..."

         "If the second marriage of a divorced woman was a moral
         defilement, of course the wife could not marry the first again
         even after the death of her second husband...because the
         defilement of the wife would be thereby repeated, and even
         increased, as the moral defilement which the divorced wife
         acquired through the second marriage was not removed by a
         divorce from the second husband, nor yet by his death."

      6. Jesus simply made clear what the Law itself implied:  To 
         divorce a woman for any reason other than sexual immorality
         would cause her to be defiled (when she remarried)!
      7. Therefore, I believe that a careful study of the Law 
         concerning divorce reveals...
         a. That Jesus' teaching was really in harmony with the Law
            itself
         b. But the "traditional interpretation and application" of the
            Law had missed the mark by placing emphasis upon the 
            mention of giving a certificate of divorce

   B. "WHOEVER MARRIES A DIVORCED WOMAN COMMITS ADULTERY"
      1. Jesus goes on to say that anyone who marries a person who has
         been divorced (lit., "put away") also commits adultery!
      2. Jesus does not use the definite article in reference to one
         put away, therefore He seems to refer to ANY "put away" 
         person!  In other words...
         a. A person put away for reasons OTHER than adultery cannot
            remarry
            1) Because such would "cause them to commit adultery"
            2) Or to put it in O.T. terms: "become defiled"
         b. Nor can a person "put away" for the reason of adultery 
            remarry
            1) For such a person is an "adulteress" or "adulterer"
            2) As such, is "defiled" and would thereby cause anyone who
               married that person to commit adultery!

CONCLUSION

1. Jesus later taught more concerning the subject of divorce and 
   remarriage - Mt 19:3-12
   a. Defining who has the right to divorce their spouse and remarry
   b. Indicating that some might need to "make themselves eunuchs" for
      the sake of the kingdom of heaven

2. But in our text (Mt 5:31-32), Jesus reveals "The Treachery Of
   Divorce"...
   a. A man who divorces his wife for any cause other than sexual
      immorality causes her to commit adultery (by placing her in a
      situation where she is likely to remarry and become defiled; 
      i.e., an adulteress)
   b. Whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery
   -- The harmful effect of divorce is seen in that it creates 
      situations where adultery is committed!

3. Perhaps we can better understand why God hates divorce - Mal 2:13-16
   a. When we put away our spouses, we treat them treacherously! 
      - Mal 2:14
   b. When we divorce our spouses, we cover our garments with violence!
      - Mal 2:16

4. Making divorce "legal" does not change the facts of the matter...
   a. The one put away still becomes defiled (commits adultery) if they
      remarry
   b. Whoever marries the one put away still commits adultery
   -- It is still a "treacherous" act!

As difficult as Jesus' teaching on the subject of divorce might seem in
today's permissive and immoral society, those who respect the authority
of Jesus Christ will abide by His teaching.

Have you found yourself in an adulterous relationship?  There is hope
in Jesus Christ (cf. 1Co 6:9-11)!  Yet true repentance requires that
you stop committing adultery, even if it means becoming a "eunuch" for
the sake of the kingdom of heaven (cf. Mt 19:11-12). 

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

From Mark Copeland... Nipping Adultery In The Bud (Matthew 5:27-30)

                        "THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

                 Nipping Adultery In The Bud (5:27-30)

INTRODUCTION

1. Though our society takes adultery lightly, it is a serious offense
   in the eyes of God...
   a. He listed it right after murder in the Ten Commandments - Exo 20:
      13-14
   b. He made it a capital offense in the Old Testament, worthy of the
      death penalty - Lev 20:10
   c. God has promised to judge those who are adulterers - He 13:4;
      1Co 6:9-10
   -- It destroys friendships, marriages, and families, contributing to
      the destruction of many children's lives!

2. How can one avoid the sin of adultery?
   a. Is the solution one of just making sure that you don't commit the
      actual act?
   b. Or is there way that one can "nip it in the bud"?

3. In His sermon on the mount, Jesus challenged His disciples...
   a. To exceed "the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees" 
      - Mt 5:20
   b. He illustrated what He meant through a series on contrasts
      1) Between what they had heard from those of old
      2) And what He was now declaring to them

4. In the second contrast (Mt 5:27-30), Jesus addressed the issue of
   adultery...
   a. In which we learn where adultery really begins
   b. And what steps can be taken to ward off committing such a serious
      offense

[On the subject of adultery, let's first note the contrast between...]

I. JESUS AND THE TRADITIONAL INTERPRETATION

   A. THE "TRADITIONAL" INTERPRETATION...
      1. The oral traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees certainly
         repeated the written commandment found in the Law - Mt 5:27
      2. But they evidently stressed that as long as one did not commit
         the actual act, one was not guilty
      3. Thereby emphasizing the "letter" of the Law, but not 
         appreciating the "spirit" behind the Law as well

   B. JESUS TAUGHT DIFFERENTLY...
      1. One does not have to commit the "act" to be guilty of adultery
      2. One is just as guilty when one "looks at a woman to lust for
         her" - Mt 5:28
      3. Note:  Not the "looking" per se, but looking "to lust" for her
         is what is wrong
         a. "to lust" means to have a strong desire for, to possess and
            dominate completely
         b. A person may look at another with admiration for beauty and
            not be guilty of "lust"

   C. JESUS' INTERPRETATION WAS IN HARMONY WITH THE LAW...
      1. Notice that the Tenth Commandment condemned coveting a 
         neighbor's wife - Exo 20:17
      2. Even in the time of Job, to "look at a woman to lust for her"
         was considered wrong - Job 31:1

[So the problem begins in the heart (cf. Mk 7:21-23).  If we can
prevent the lusting in the heart (or the "lustful eye"), the problem of
adultery is "nipped in the bud"!  Jesus goes on to say what we should
do with respect to the lustful eye or any other stumbling blocks...]

II. JESUS' PROGNOSIS FOR LUSTFUL EYES AND OTHER STUMBLING BLOCKS

   A. "PLUCK IT OUT AND CAST IT FROM YOU..."
      1. That Jesus is not being literal should be obvious, for one
         could still stumble with the left eye or hand
      2. The key to understanding this passage is found in Mt 18:7-9
         a. The "eye" and "hand" represent "offenses"
         b. Offenses are "stumbling blocks" that lead a person to sin
         c. These would be enticements to do wrong, beguiling 
            allurements

   B. THE MEANING OF JESUS' TEACHING...
      1. "Take drastic action in getting rid of whatever in the natural
         course of events will tempt you to sin" (Hendriksen)
      2. Such should be the case in regards to ALL sin, as well as the
         sin of adultery

[As we contemplate Jesus' words, there are several...]

III. IMPORTANT LESSONS TO BE LEARNED

   A. THE PRESENT IS NOT OUR ONLY LIFE; WE ARE DESTINED FOR ETERNITY!
      1. The future holds the possibility of "hell" (Greek, GEHENNA,
         the place of everlasting torment)
      2. What we do or not do in the present will determine our place
         in the future

   B. NOTHING, NO MATTER HOW PRECIOUS, SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DOOM OUR
      GLORIOUS DESTINY!
      1. God's goal for us is the "kingdom of heaven" in all its 
         eternal glory!
      2. What on "earth" (such as an adulterous relationship) can be
         worthy of losing that?

   C. SIN, BEING A VERY DESTRUCTIVE FORCE, MUST NOT BE PAMPERED!
      1. Do we need to be convinced that sin (like adultery) is 
         destructive to those around us?
      2. Sin is to the soul what cancer is to the body
         a. Delay can be deadly!
         b. Halfway measures, halfhearted efforts, only give sin time
            to wreak havoc!
      2. "Radical surgery" is what's necessary to treat the "cancer" of
         sin!
         a. Cut off those things that might lead you to look upon 
            others to lust after them
         b. How much better to dwell upon such things as mentioned in
            Php 4:8!
         c. Remove all stumbling blocks that encourage you to sin!
            1) Such as certain books, movies, pictures
            2) Or possible companions, associates - cf. 1Co 15:33
         -- As Paul exhorted the Corinthians , and Joseph illustrated
            by example, "flee sexual immorality"! - 1Co 6:18; Gen 39:
            7-12

CONCLUSION

1. Our families, our friends, our lives, and especially our souls are
   too precious to allow the sin of adultery to destroy them!

2. But if we desire to "nip it in the bud", we cannot be content with
   the righteousness of the  Scribes and Pharisees...
   a. Who may have faithfully quoted the Law to others
   b. But were unwilling to deal with the real problem, which is one of
      the heart!

3. In view of the reality of hell, the eternal abode of impenitent
   adulterers...
   a. Let us be willing to tackle the "cancer" of sin seriously
   b. Performing whatever "radical surgery" might be necessary!

While one may not be able to rebuild the lives destroyed by the sin of
adultery, for the penitent adulterer there is still the hope of 
salvation in Christ Jesus, as there is for all... - cf. 1Co 6:9-11
Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

From Mark Copeland... The Anger That Kills (Matthew 5:21-26)

                        "THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

                     The Anger That Kills (5:21-26)

INTRODUCTION

1. In His sermon on the mount, Jesus challenges us to attain to a high
   level of righteousness...
   a. To exceed "the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees"
      - Mt 5:20
   b. He illustrates what is meant through a series on contrasts
      1) Between what they had heard from those of old
      2) And what He was now declaring to them

2. The first contrast (Mt 5:21-26) pertains to properly understanding
   and applying...
   a. The Sixth Commandment
   b. I.e., "You shall not murder" - cf. Exo 20:13

[How should the sixth command be understood and applied?  Is the actual
act of murder the only thing we need to be concerned about?  Before we
consider what Jesus taught, let's look at...]

I. THE "TRADITIONAL" INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION

   A. NOTE THAT I SAY "TRADITIONAL"...
      1. Jesus is responding to traditional interpretations of the Law,
         not the Law itself
         a. I.e., what had been taught by the "traditions of the
            elders" - cf. Mt 15:2
         b. Note His preparatory remarks:  "You have HEARD that it was
            SAID..."
         c. Referring to oral traditions rather than the written Law
            (cf. earlier lesson on "Jesus And The Law")
      2. Which traditions had likely been accepted by the scribes and
         Pharisees

   B. THE TRADITIONAL INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION...
      1. Is seen in the phrase "whoever murders will be in danger of
         the judgment"
      2. The term "judgment" likely refers to the local courts of their
         day (see below)
      3. This interpretation may sound fine, but evidently did not go
         far enough in how the Law should have been interpreted and
         applied
         a. Was the Law only concerned about the actual act of murder?
         b. Should the disciples of Jesus also limit their concern to
            actual acts of murder?

[To answer these two questions, let's now take a closer look at...]

II. THE TEACHING OF JESUS

   A. JESUS PRONOUNCED JUDGMENT ON ANGER...
      1. As found in Mt 5:22...
         a. One angry without a cause should be in danger of the 
            "judgment"
            1) I.e., the local courts through Palestine
            2) Which were normally reserved for common criminals
         b. One who calls his brother "Raca!" (stupid, empty-headed)
            should be in danger of the "council"
            1) I.e., the Sanhedrin council
            2) Which was the high court normally reserved for special
               criminals
         c. One who says "You fool!" would be in danger of "hell fire"
            1) I.e., Gehenna
            2) The place of everlasting torment - Mk 9:43-48
         -- The judgment normally accorded to murderers, Jesus deemed
            worthy of those whose anger led to just verbal abuse!
      2. Jesus' teaching was in harmony with the Law regarding anger 
         - cf. Pr 6:16-19
         a. "Hands that shed innocent blood" (murder) are an
            abomination to the Lord
         b. So also a "heart that devises wicked plans" and "one who
            sows discord among brethren" (due to anger)
         -- This being true, the Law should have been interpreted and
            applied accordingly
      3. Thus the traditional interpretation and application of the Law
         fell far short
         a. The "righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees" only 
            condemned murderers when those with hateful emotions were
            just as guilty!
         b. While the righteousness of the kingdom would be in harmony
            with the original intent of the Law
            1) The Law taught to forsake wrath and anger - Ps 37:8
            2) So does the righteousness of the kingdom - cf. Ga 5:19-
               21; Ep 4:31

   B. JESUS ILLUSTRATED THE SERIOUSNESS OF ANGER...
      1. We should not try to worship God when we are "at odds" with a
         brother - Mt 5:23-24
         a. Repair strained relationships with a brother before 
            worshipping God
         b. Just as a husband must treat his wife with understanding if
            he desires to have his prayers heard - 1Pe 3:7
         -- Wrong emotions toward others can "kill" our relationship 
            with God!
      2. We should be quick to "make amends" lest uncontrolled anger
         cause us to wind up in court, possibly prison! - Mt 5:25-26
         a. Many "hot-heads" let anger prompt them to do things that
            send them to prison
         b. But note how those in the kingdom are to act - Ro 12:18-21
         -- Wrong emotions can "murder" our relationships with man as
            well!

CONCLUSION

1. In His first contrast between the "righteousness of the kingdom" and
   the "traditional treatment of the Law", Jesus:
   a. Declared that the ancients did not go far enough in applying the
      Law
   b. Illustrated how it should be applied by those seeking to surpass
      the "righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees"
   -- The "righteousness of the kingdom" is actually in harmony with
      the Law!

2. Jesus also reminds us that there is "The Anger That Kills"...
   a. Improper anger toward our fellow man can "kill" our relationship
      with God
   b. It can "murder" our relationships with our fellow man, and ruin
      our lives in the process
   -- One does not have to be guilty of actual murder to do this!
   
Thus Jesus calls upon us to deal with the anger that often leads to
murder, if we desire to truly be His disciples!  This requires that we
be "born again"... - cf. Jn 3:5; 1Pe 1:22-23

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

From Mark Copeland... Righteousness Of The Scribes And Pharisees (Matthew 5:20)

                        "THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

           Righteousness Of The Scribes And Pharisees (5:20)

INTRODUCTION

1. As Jesus prepares to contrast the righteousness of the kingdom with
   the traditional interpretation and application of the Law, He does
   so with a strong warning to those who would enter the kingdom of
   heaven

2. Found in Mt 5:20, Jesus warned that...

   "unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes
   and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven"!

[To appreciate and apply what Jesus said, it might help if we first
examined...]

I. THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES

   A. THEY WERE KNOWN TO "SAY AND DO NOT" - Mt 23:1-4
      1. Though they often taught the truth, they did not often
         practice what they preached!
      2. From them many parents got the saying "Do as I say, not as I
         do"

   B. THEY WERE KNOWN TO DO THINGS TO BE SEEN OF MEN - Mt 23:5-7
      1. They enjoyed wearing religious garments that separated them
         from others, and delighted in places and titles of honor
      2. Does this sound like any religious leaders today?

   C. THEY WERE KNOWN TO NEGLECT PARTS OF GOD'S LAW - Mt 23:23-24
      1. In their case, they would emphasize the "lighter" matters of
         the law, while neglecting the "weightier" commands
      2. Or as we would say today, they "majored in minors and minored
         in majors"

   D. THEY WERE KNOWN TO BE LOVERS OF MONEY - Lk 16:13-15
      1. "Mammon" was their god, though they would be quick to deny it
         and try to justify themselves before men
      2. Does this sound like any "prosperity preachers" we see and
         hear today?

[Such was the level of "righteousness" the scribes and Pharisees as a
group.  Not all scribes and Pharisees were guilty of such things (e.g.,
Nicodemus, Jn 3:1; 7:45-52; 19:38-42).

Why must our righteousness exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees? 
The righteousness of the kingdom demands more!]

II. THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE KINGDOM

   A. WE LEARN IN THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT THAT...
      1. We cannot "say and do not" - Mt 7:21
      2. We cannot "do things to be seen of men" - Mt 6:1
      3. We cannot "neglect" ANY commandments of God's law - Mt 5:19
      4. We cannot be "lovers of money" - Mt 6:24

   B. THIS SHOULD SERVE AS A WARNING TO ANY WHO THINK THEY CAN BE
      FAITHFUL CHRISTIANS, BUT DO NOT...
      1. Combine their profession of faith with suitable deeds - cf.
         Jm 2:14-17; 1Jn 2:4-6; 1Jn 3:18
      2. Keep their personal, private lives consistent with their
         public appearance and profession - cf. Mk 4:22
      3. Make diligent effort to observe ALL that Jesus commanded - cf.
         Mt 28:20; Jn 8:31-32; 2Jn 9
      4. Remain free from the enticement of materialism - cf. 1Ti 6:
         9-10; 1Jn 2:15-17

CONCLUSION

1. Without question, our righteousness as citizens of the kingdom must
   exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees

2. But how can our righteousness be consistent with that demanded by 
   our King?  It is possible only by the grace of God...
   a. Whereby His mercy provides forgiveness to those in Christ - 1Jn 1:9
   b. Whereby His strength makes it possible to live according to the
      "righteousness of the kingdom of heaven"! - Php 4:13

In our next study, we will begin to notice the various examples Jesus
gave as to how our righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and
Pharisees...

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

From Mark Copeland... Jesus And The Law (Matthew 5:17-19)

                        "THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

                      Jesus And The Law (5:17-19)

INTRODUCTION

1. Up to this point, Jesus has been describing the "citizens" of the
   kingdom...
   a. Their character and blessedness - Mt 5:3-12
   b. Their influence on the world - Mt 5:13-16

2. The next section details the "righteousness" of the kingdom...
   a. The righteousness conduct Jesus would expect of His disciples
   b. In contrast with the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees

3. He begins by correcting any false impression some may have had about
   His relationship with the Law of Moses and the Prophets...
   a. Had He come to destroy the Law and the Prophets?
   b. Are His teachings contradictory to the Law and the Prophets?

[In Mt 5:17-19, we find His answer to such questions. Our first
observation is that...]

I. HE CAME NOT TO DESTROY, BUT TO FULFILL

   A. SOME MAY HAVE THOUGHT JESUS INTENDED TO TOTALLY DISREGARD THE
      LAW...
      1. That His coming and teaching would regard the Old Law in a
         negative light
      2. For the expression "to destroy" means literally to "to destroy
         utterly, to overthrow completely" (VINE)

   B. ON THE CONTRARY, HIS PURPOSE WAS TO "FULFILL" THE LAW AND THE
      PROPHETS...
      1. For they foretold the coming of the Messiah (Christ)
         a. There are approximately 330 prophecies concerning the
            Christ found in the Law and the Prophets
         b. For example, Deut 18:15,18-19; Isa 53:1-12
      2. For they foretold the coming of the kingdom of God
         a. One example is Dan 2:44
         b. Jesus proclaimed the fulfillment of that prophecy was now
            at hand - Mk 1:14-15
      3. For they also foretold the establishment of a new and 
         different covenant for the people of God
         a. See Jer 31:31-34
         b. That Jesus brought in this new covenant is confirmed in 
            He 8:6-13

   C. THEREFORE, UNTIL THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS WERE FULFILLED, JESUS
      TAUGHT THAT...
      1. The Law would be as permanent as the heavens and the earth 
         - Mt 5:18
         a. As He said in Lk 16:17, "It is easier for heaven and earth
            to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fail."
         b. There would be no change at all, until it was fulfilled
         c. Not even a "jot" or a "tittle" (Hebrew grammatical 
            markings, similar to the dotting of an "i" or the crossing
            of a "t")
      2. A person's treatment of the Law (while still in force) would
         affect their standing in the kingdom - Mt 5:19  How so...?
         a. Remember that the kingdom has a future aspect - Mt 7:21-23
         b. Those who lived before the coming of the kingdom in its
            present sense (i.e., the church) could still be in the 
            kingdom in its future sense
            1) Note what is said about Abraham, Isaac, Jacob - Mt 8:11
            2) But then notice what was said about the "sons of the
               kingdom," those Jews who by the Law had the right to
               inherit the kingdom but did not appreciate its 
               fulfillment in the coming of Jesus Christ! - Mt 8:12
         -- Thus, one's standing in the kingdom (in its future sense)
            would be affected by their treatment of whatever Law of God
            was in effect when they were alive!

   D. AN IMPORTANT QUESTION: "DID JESUS FULFILL THE LAW?"
      1. If He did not...
         a. He failed His purpose in coming to this earth! - Mt 5:17
         b. We had better observe the Law in its strictest sense! 
            - Mt 5:18-19 (including circumcision, and not eating 
              unclean meats!)
      2. If He did...
         a. He accomplished His purpose! (notice Jn 17:4)
         b. We should not be surprised to find a NEW Law or Covenant
            governing God's people today
      3. Indeed, Jesus must have fulfilled the Old Law...
         a. For there has been changes:
            1) In the priesthood - He 7:11-14
            2) In the Law itself - He 7:18-19,22
         b. As the Law itself foretold, it has been replaced by a New
            Law - He 8:6-13

[Though Jesus ultimately fulfilled the Law and the Prophets, at the
time He was preaching this sermon they had not been fulfilled.  So,
true to His statement in verse nineteen, He taught His disciples to be
faithful to God's Law as it then stood.

But what about the contrasts found in Mt 5:21-48?  Are not these to be
viewed as comparisons between the Old and New Law?  Here are some 
thoughts along these lines...]

II. THE CONTRAST MADE BY JESUS

   A. MANY UNDERSTAND JESUS WAS CONTRASTING THE "OLD" AND "NEW"...
      1. I.e., comparing the "Law of Moses" with the "Law of Christ"
         which would govern His kingdom
      2. This in essence has Jesus teaching:
         a. That the "Old Law" only condemned the outward actions
         b. But that the "New Law" introduced by Jesus condemned the
            inner conditions which lead to the outer actions

   B. HOWEVER, I UNDERSTAND THE CONTRAST TO BE DIFFERENT...
      1. It was a contrast between:
         a. The "traditional interpretation and application" of the Law
         b. The "righteousness of the kingdom" Jesus would require of
            His disciples
      2. In fact, Jesus demonstrated that the righteousness of the 
         kingdom...
         a. Was not only contrary to the manner many had interpreted
            and applied the Law
         b. But was in harmony with the original spirit of the Law as
            given to Moses and the Israelites

   C. REASONS FOR SUCH A VIEW...
      1. The other view would seem strange in light of verse 19
         a. Jesus had just warned against any alteration of the 
            commandments of the Law!
         b. The first view has Jesus doing the very thing He had just
            warned against!
      2. If Jesus was referring to what Moses had commanded in the Law
         itself, it is likely different wording would have been used
         a. At other times, when Jesus was definitely referring to what
            the Law actually said, He prefaced it with things like:
            1) "Moses commanded" - Mt 8:4
            2) "It is written" - Mt 4:4,7,10
         b. Instead, we find Jesus repeatedly using phrases more likely
            to refer to ORAL teachings and interpretations rather than
            the WRITTEN Word of God:
            1) "You have heard that it was said to those of old"
               - Mt 5:21,27
            2) "Furthermore it has been said" - Mt 5:31
            3) "Again you have heard that it was said to those of old"
               - Mt 5:33
            4) "You have heard that it was said" - Mt 5:38,43
      3. In two of the contrasts, Jesus refers to statements not even
         found in the Law of Moses!
         a. "...and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment"
            - Mt 5:21
         b. "...and hate your enemy" - Mt 5:43
         -- Here, Jesus reacted, not to the Law itself, but to the way
            it was often used!
      4. We should also remember that the "Law and the Prophets" were
         just as concerned with the inner thoughts of the heart as the
         Law of Christ is - cf. Deut 6:4-7; Isa 29:13-14

CONCLUSION

1. So Jesus came...
   a. Not to destroy the Law, but to fulfill the Law
   b. Which He did, by fulfilling its many prophecies
   -- That Law has now been replaced by the New Covenant of our Lord

2. In illustrating the righteousness expected of those under the New
   Covenant, Jesus will...
   a. Contrast it with the traditional interpretations and applications
      orally handed down
   b. Demonstrate how our righteousness must indeed exceed that of the
      scribes and Pharisees!

In our next lesson, we shall begin looking at the righteousness Jesus
demands...

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011