3. Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4. Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.
5. Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
6. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
7. Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
8. Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
9. Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
10. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
12. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
(Matt.5:3-12; KJV)

In the preface to the Beattitudes (from the Latin, beatus, meaning "blessedness", from Jerome's Latin version, the "Vulgate" - 410 AD) we are told: "His disciples came unto him" (5:1). Before examining the Sermon we must understand to whom it was addressed -- not to unbelievers but to His "disciples". We must first understand, therefore, exactly what a "disciple" is. It is literally, "one who is under discipline" or a "follower of a religious leader". Important though this is concept of discipline is, on its own it smacks a little of the military which is why we need to return to the original Hebrew term, talmid (male disciple) or talmidah (female disciple) (JNT). "Disciple" fails to convey the richness of the relationship between a rabbi and his talmidim (disciples) in the first century A.D. Teachers like Jesus attracted followers who wholeheartedly gave themselves over to their teachers (though not in a mindless way as happens today in some cults). The essence of the relationship was one of trust in every area of living, and its goal was to make the talmid like his rabbi in knowledge, wisdom and ethical behaviour. Not only did the talmid learn facts, reasoning processes, and how to perform religious practices from his rabbi, but he regarded him as an example to be imitated in conduct and character (cp. Mt.10:24-25; Lk.6:40; Jn.13:13-15; 1 Cor.11:1). The rabbi, in turn, was considered responsible for his talmidim (Mt.12:2; Lk.19:39; Jn.17:12).

Alas, this master-pupil, teacher-disciple relationship is almost completely absent from Christendom, largely because there is little true apostolic authority on the earth despite the fact that many denominations ordain "apostles". Thus there is considerable mistrust between modern "teachers" and "disciples", and with some justification.

There are three types of teacher ("rabbi") in the New Covenant Church of God: (1) Teacher-Deacons, whose responsiblity is to teach the literal written Word in Scripture (p'shat), (2) Teacher-Elders, whose responsibility is to teach both the literal p'shat as well as the limited mesoteric remez mode, and (3) the Apostles, whose responsibility is to teach all the above plus mesoteric midrash, and the Patriarch-Apostles, esoteric sod) (see The Four Scriptural Modes of Interpretation, NCW 36:5-11). Jesus, as "the Apostle and High Priest" (Heb.3:1, NIV) teaches all four modes in the Gospels.

To appreciate the Sermon on the Mount requires appropriate discipleship -- it will not be fully understood by those who do not enjoy a true talmid relationship.

Opinion differs as to whether the Sermon is a summary of what Jesus taught on one occasion or a compilation of teachings presented on numerous occasions. Some argue that Matthew possibly took a single sermon and expanded it with other relevent teachings of Jesus. Thirty-four of the verses in Matthew's Sermon occur in contexts in Luke and other than the apparently parallel Sermon on the Plain (Lk.6:17-49).

It is the opinion of this writer that Matthew's Sermon was delivered as recorded and used elsewhere by Luke, and that it should therefore be seen as an integrated whole. We base this on four major strands of thought: (1) Matthew (Mattiyahu) was an earlier disciple of Jesus than Luke; (2) He wrote his Gospel in the original Aramaic/Hebrew; (3) The internal evidence of the Sermon suggests a deliberate structure designed to convey truth from the exoteric to the esoteric; and (4) The location, on a mountain, suggests a direct parallel with Mount Sinai on which the original Torah (Law) was given (cp. Luke's Sermon which was given on the plain).

The Sermon on the Mount is God's call to His talmidim to be perfect in the context of the New Covenant. It's moral and ethical standards are so high that some have dismissed it as being completely unrealistic or have projected its fulfilment to the future, Millennial Kingdom.. There is no doubt, however, that Jesus (and Matthew) gave the sermon as a standard for all true Christian talmidim, realising that its demands cannot be met in our own power. It is also true that Jesus occasionally used hyperbole to make His point (see, for example, 5:29-30).

"And seeing the multitudes, He went up into a mountain.." (5:1, KJV). The exact location is uncertain but it may have been the gently sloping hillside at the north-west corner of the Sea of Galilee, not far from K'far Nachum (Capernaum). The New Torah (Law), like the Old (Ex.19:3), was given from a mountain. But there is a difference, as the geography of the two locations suggests so vividly. The old Mount -- high, rugged, hot, parched, in the middle of a wilderness (and possibly with the salt-water Red Sea/Gulf of Aqaba in view) -- and the new Mount -- low, smooth, green, and overlooking the sparkling, tranqil fresh-water Sea of Galillee -- suggesive of even more joy and peace in the New Torah than the Old. In one word, Grace. Living the Torah is to be made considerably easier and more joyful in the Lord of Grace, Jesus Christ, even though its exacting standards are every bit as difficult as the Old. Throughout His ministry Jesus emphasises that the Law is not to be diluted or replaced, but brought to completion in Him. To live the New Law is only to be accomplished by living in Him.

"..for My sake." (5:11, KJV), "..because of Me" (NIV), "..because you follow Me!" (JNT). This short phrase is not an accidental insertion at the end of the Beattitudes but is a literary device linking all that preceeds it, making the Beattitudes a single statement. In other words, the different components are but parts of a whole, and we must never lose light of that whole if we are to obtain the full meaning.

"(How) Blessed.." (KJV, NIV, JNT) is the Alpha theme word for the Beattitudes, just as "..for My Sake" is the Omega theme word:

is the "whole" message of the Beattitudes -- everything else is but an amplification of the central message and cannot be seen apart from it. It is the vessel which "holds" everything else. Thus any attempt to relate the teachings of the Beattitudes apart from Jesus is to pervert and/or falsify its meaning. (V.3 has, for example, been falsely used to justify a secular socialist political agenda).

The word for "blessed" is makarioi which means "to be characterised by the quality of God", in other words, to be filled with the divine nature. It corresponds to the Hebrew asher which means "blessed", "happy", and "fortunate" all at once, so that a single English word is inadequate. Cp. Psalm 144:4, "How blessed/happy/fortunate the people whose God is Adonai/Yahweh/the Lord". Thus when one is indwelt by God, and God's nature is within him, he has the kingdom of God within him (Lk.17:21). But "blessed" has a fourth meaning also, namely, "to be fully satisfied". This satisfaction is not, however, due to the circumstances of life nor the conditions prescribed in these Beattitudes, but due to Christ's indwelling. Therefore is is misleading to translate makarioi as only "happy", as some modern translations do (TEV, LB) because happiness is connected with luck (hap, from the verb "happen"). People can be happy because of favourable circumstances, but they can only be blessed because of Christ. It is an emotion often dependant on outward circumstances. Blessedness is that basic condition created by Christ's indwelling in man's heart which brings a fundamental satisfaction in the life of a believer. It is an ultimate sense of well-being and the distinctive spiritual joy of those who share in the salvation of the kingdom of God, and can be present even when ones outward circumstances are anything but happy, such as in times of persecution (see v.11).

Blessedness, however, is not static, but progressive. This progressiveness of blessedness depends upon the fulfilment of the conditions set down in the Beattitudes which follow, and our fulfilment of them is in fact the sign that we are blessed by Christ or are merely pretending to be.

"Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" (5:3). The "poor in spirit" (Gk. ptóchos) -- the "poor" here indicates the helpless person contrasted to penés, which means "poor but able to help oneself". Thus the first step to spiritual blessedness is the realisation of one's spiritual helplessness. Thus the "poor in spirit" are those who have the humble, dependent, vunerable attitude of poor people, even if they happen to be rich, in contrast to the spiritually proud and self-sufficient.

Jesus is not teaching, "Blessed are the financially poor", neither is He teaching, "Blessed are the ignorant", as some have erroneously interpreted this passage because of the Lord's teaching on the rich in the Sermon on the Plain (Lk.6:24). These Beattitudes were undoubtedly taught by Jesus many times to different people, and as was typical of Him, He modified and adapted His teachings to fit the circumstances. Whilst He most certainly teaches that wealth is an obstacle to spiritual blessedness because of the pride and attitude of self-sufficiency it usually generates (Mt.19:24; Mk.10:25; Lk.18:25) He never related physical poverty to blessedness. This has caused some to misunderstand Lk.6:20: "Blessed be ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God" (KJV); "Blessed are you who are poor.." (NIV); "How blessed are you poor" (JNT). Seen in the context of Matthew's Sermon on the Mount and in all his other teachings, Jesus can only possibly mean here: "Blessed are you who are poor if this leads you to be humble, dependent, and vunerable in spirit", bearing in mind that the vast majority of His listeners lived in abject physical poverty and lacked hope. What a contrast to the modern so-called "Holy Spirit Movement" where material wealth is falsely associated with blessedness (the "health and wealth" movement).

The kingdom is therefore more a gift than a recompense -- it is not something to be earned by good works, but the natural indwelling of God's Spirit in those who are humble, dependent, sensitive and vunerable.

"Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted" (5:4, KJV). This does not, as many suppose, mean that God will comfort any and every kind of grief. "They that mourn" translates the Greek, hoi penthountes, which literally means sorrow for one's sins and the sins of others. In short, "Blessed are those who repent of their sins and feel empathy with those who are likewise struggling with sin."

What a contrast to the modern charismatic movement which in essence calls for people to "sing and praise" their sorrows away! The true Gospel is one of balance: there is "..a time to weep and a time to laugh, a time to mourn and a time to dance.." (Eccl.3:4, NIV).

"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth (JNT, the Land)" (5:5, KJV). This Beattitude is taken from Ps.37:11, "But the meek will inherit the land and enjoy great peace" (NIV). The word "meek" (Eng. humble, patient, submissive) in Greek is a complex word. It refers not so much an attitude towards man as to a disposition before God, namely, humility, though this will naturally reflect on our relationship with our fellow men. The NASB renders the passage, "Blessed are the gentle.." which reflects another important quality of the man who is indwelt by God's Spirit. "The servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient" (2 Tim.2:24; KJV). "..speak evil of no man...but (be) gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men" (Tit.3:2, KJV). "..the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy" (Jas.3:17, KJV). "Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward (harsh)" (1 Pet.2:18, KJV). Of the apostles, Paul says: "..we were gentle among you, like a mother caring for her little children" (1 Thes.2:7, NIV). Of Moses, who has been falsely caricatured as a harsh and cruel patriarch, the Lord said: "Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth" (Num.12:3, KJV).

There is another side to meekness which cannot be ignored, however. It is derived from prautés, praos, or praus meaning, in this context, to become angry at sin. It is the active attitude of the Christian toward sin in combatting it instead of a passive, indifferent attitude. Indeed, this is the only really satisfactory way of understanding the next Beattitude on "hungering and thirsting for righteousness" (see v.6). Indeed, we are to understand that the person who is not actively combatting sin is not truly humble towards God because he is not submitted to God's will.

What about the inheritance of the meek? Is it the "whole earth" or just the "Land of Israel"? Christians often think that since the Gospel is for all humanity God is no longer interested in Israel as a nation (even though Mt.23:37-39 proves the opposite). This error, known variously as "Replacement theology", "Dominion theology", "Kingdom Now thology", "Covenant theology" (in some of its forms -- no reference to New Covenant Church theology), "Reconstructionism" and (in England) "Restorationism" (nothing to do with Latter-day Saint theology), is so widespread now that New Testament passages are even mis-translated in conformance with it (see Rom.10:1-9, which should properly read: "Brothers, my heart's deepest desire and my prayer to God for Israel is for their salvation; for I can testify to their zeal for God. But it is not based on correct understanding; for, since they are unaware of God's way of making people righteous and instead seek to set up their own, they have not submitted themselves to God's way of making people righteous. For the goal at which the Torah aims is the Messiah, who offers righteousness to everyone who trusts. For Moshe (Moses) writes about the righteousness grounded in the Torah that the person who does these things will attain life through them. Moreover, the righteousness grounded in trusting says: Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend to heaven?' -- that is, to bring the Messiah down -- or, 'Who will descend into Sh'ol?' - that is, to bring the Messiah up from the dead. What, then, does it say? 'The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart' -- that is, the word about trust which we proclaim, namely, that if you acknowledge publically with your mouth that Yeshua (Jesus) is Lord and trust in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be delivered" (JNT)).

The present verse (Mt.5:5) is one of those passages. Most Bible versions inform the reader that "the meek" (presumably all the meek from all the nations) "shall inherit the earth", ruling the entire planet. While believers will return to rule with Christ at His Second Coming (1 Thes.4:13-18; Rev.20), here Jesus is quoting Psalm 37:11, where the context makes it clear that "the meek" refers to the meek of Israel, who, according to God's promises, "will inherit the Land", the Land of Israel, which Matthew mentions explicitly in Mt.2:20-21.

Although the Greek gê can mean either "earth" or "land", in Psalm 37 the Hebrew word eretz means "Land" (and not "earth") not less than six times: those of Israel who trust in Adonai (the Lord) will "dwell in the Land" (v.3); and those of Israel who wait upon Adonai (v.9), His way (v.34) will "inherit the Land". The term "inherit" in the Tanakh (Old Testament) refers to the Hebrew people's inheritance from God, which includes, in addition to spiritual elements, not the whole earth but a specific small territory on the east shore of the Mediterranean Sea.

Because the Gospel is universal, and bacause of the false theology teaching that God is no longer interested in the Jews as a nation, Christians have tended to suppose that the New Testament somehow cancels God's promise to give the Jewish people the Land of Israel. No small amount of opposition to the present-day State of Israel on the part of Christians is based on this false assumption. To combat this error it is important for Jews and Christians alike to understand that the New Testament does not alter any of God's promises to the Jewish people; God's literal promises are not somehow "spiritualised" out of existence "in Christ" even though there is, of course, a very important spiritual component, namely, the adoption of all true Christians into the Jewish inheritance.

Eighteen times in the New Testament the Greek phrase ê gê refers to the Land of Israel. As mentioned, two are explicit -- Matthew calls the Holy Land Eretz-Israel twice (Mt.2:20-21). Four are citations from the Old Testament -- here (Ps.37:11), Mt.24:30 and Rev.1:7 (Zec.12:10,14) and Eph.6:3 (Dt.5:17). Five are based on the Old Testament without being citations -- Lk.4:25 and Jas.5:17-18 (1 Ki.17:1; 18:1,41-45), Heb.11:9 (Gen.12,13,15,20,23) and Rev.20:9 (Ez.38-39). The remaining eight are implied by context -- Mt.5:13; 10:34; 27:45; Mk.15:33; Lk.12:51; 21:23; 23:44; Rev.11:10. Because Replacement theologians claim that God no longer promises the Land of Israel to the Jews, it is important to see that the New Testament still gives Jewish possession of the physical Land of Israel a significant place in God's plan.

Why is it important that we interpret Mt.5:5 in terms of the Land of Israel and not the whole earth? Because that is what it says. This is the only literal (p'shat) meaning it can have. It would be true to say that all true Christians of all true nations will inherit the whole planet in the Millennium but that can only be secondary to the main meaning. Without the State of Israel there can be no planetary inheritance, because Israel is to be at the centre of the Millennial Government, with Jerusalem the planetary (as well as Israel's) capital. The blessedness of the meek therefore has physical as well as a spiritual components AND THESE TWO MUST THEREFORE BE INSEPARABLE.

It is at this point that we must point out the extreme danger of divorcing the Gospel of Jesus Christ from its practical, outward physical aspect. Neither the Old nor the New Testament does it. Historically Christianity was "stateless" (despite so-called "Christian states" which actually killed off the true Gospel from the time of Constantine onwards by politicising it after the fallen pattern of the world) from the time of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans to the time of the restoration of the State of Israel from 1947 to 1969. Having said this, the State of Israel is not a Christian theocracy as it will be in the Millennium, and its return politically to the (non-Christian) Jews is just a part of its full restoration. Though there are some Messianic Jews and "Gentile Christians" living in the State of Israel, it is not a Christian theocracy but a secular, Jewish state.

How, then, can Mt.5:5 be fulfilled? The "meek" have not as yet "inherited the Land (of Israel)". In a secondary sense, of course, we may speak of all true Christians inheriting a "spiritual Land" -- their heavenly inheritance, the New Jerusalem -- but that is for the future. Jesus here is speaking of the here and now. How, then, can this scripture be literally fulfilled before the Millennium?

The answer which New Covenant Christians have been given by revelation from God is by establishing colonies or communities (called by us "firstborn colonies") where Christians can live together as if they were in the Millennial Land of Israel (Zion), observing a theocratic system of government. We speak of establishing twelve of these across the face of the earth where the groundwork of the practical as well as the spiritual Millennial Kingdom of God can be established. This is the only way that the blessing of the Third Beattitude can be fulfilled today. Indeed, it is the only way in which true meekness/gentleness/humility can be developed to perfection through the exposure and forgiveness of sin through Christ the Lord. This work is already under way.

"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled" (5:6, KJV). This is very much connected with the preceeding verse which demands "active meekness". When a man exercises active combattiveness against sin, he hungers for a new filling of God's righteousness (Gk. dikaiosuné) which is the realisation of God's rightful expectation of the believer. "Which do hunger.." ("those who hunger" -- NIV, JNT) is the Greek present participle hoi peinónthes which is better rendered "the hungering ones", indicating constant and iterative satisfaction with God's righteousness, expending the received energy and hungering anew over and over as with physical hunger. Thus those who are just sitting back contentedly with what they have (or don't have) are missing out entirely on this blessing. There is a constant hungering and thirsting for more of God's righteousness.

What does the word "righteousness" mean? It means conformity to a standard of perfection -- holiness, justice and right-doing. When applied to a man, righteousness signifies the possession of the Christian virtues or fruits of faith, hope, and love, and generally a life which conforms to the divine Torah (Law) (Gen.15:6; 30:33; Mt.5:10,20). As with the previous Beattitude, this includes both the physical and spiritual domains. It implies not only individual righteousness but the righteousness of the Christian community located in physical time and space in Eretz-Israel, the theocratic community (or for those without this blessing, a Church), for it is here that the individual and spiritual aspect will grow to perfection.

"And it will be righteousness for us if we are careful to observe all this commandment before the Lord our God, just as He commanded us" (Dt.6:25, NASB). "..unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven" (Mt.5:20, NASB). We are not here, of course, talking about legalistic obedience of the commandments -- that is to say, obedience in order to be made right with God (for that is by faith only) as the Pharisees tried to do -- but of obedience out of love and a desire to please God for its own sake. Until there is a hunger and a thirst to be obedient to all of God's commandments (the Torah/Law -- see v.17-18) the blessing of being filled with the Holy Spirit CANNOT BE ACCOMPLISHED. We will be "filled" only in proportion to our obedience, and no more.

"Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy" (5:7, KJV). The outward demonstration of the Christian character is shown in "mercifulness" (Gk. eleos) which is to empathise with the unbeliever (as well as the struggling believer) and suffering with him the consequences of his sin and doing everything possible to relieve the tragic results. The difference between "grace" (charis) and eleos, is that the first affects the character of a person and changes it. Only God can show grace but we are admonished to show mercy and and be eleemones, "merciful", to alleviate the consequences of sin. "Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful" (Lk.6:36, NASB).

To be merciful means to hold oneself back from punishing, or from causing suffering to, someone we have the right or power to punish. The blessing of being merciful is that we, in our turn, will be shown mercy back by Christ. "Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors" (Mt.6:12, NIV). Forgiving others does not mean that they will necessarily forgive us our wrong-doings to them (though if they are Christians they ought to) any more than showing mercy to others will guarantee they will show mercy to us -- rather, God will forgive us for similar transgressions and show us mercy when we are deserving of punishment, though sometimes our goodness is reciprocated. But we must remember that this act of grace on our part must be viewed and carried out within the context of the other Beattitudes, namely, humility (as opposed to "buying someone off" in order to escape justice), gentleness, the quest for righteousness, etc..

"Keep speaking and acting like people who will be judged by a Torah (Law) which gives freedom. For judgment will be without mercy toward one who doesn't show mercy; but mercy wins out over judgment" (Jas.2:12-13, JNT). James tells us here that the believer is going to be judged (2 Cor.5:10). The judge is, of course, Jesus Christ. He is not going to be absolutely rigid. He is going to exercise liberality or generosity in many cases toward those who are judged. V.13 explains how the judgment is going to be determined: "For the judgment is without mercy to him who did no mercy or showed no mercifulness" (Zodhiates trans.). Which explains Mt.5:7, "Blessed are the merciful ones, for they shall be shown mercy" (Ibid.). The Judge's generosity toward the believer will be proportionate to the amount of mercy that the believer showed while on earth. If he showed no mercy, he will receive no mercy. The entrance into heaven is a result of the work which Christ alone did, yet the enjoyment of heaven and its rewards will be proportionate to what the believer did for Christ in his life of faith on earth. There are consequences for our willfil or unwillful sins on earth for which we may not have repented, or if we had repented, we may have been unable to provide restoration for the evil that we have caused. For these, according to Heb.10:26, there can be no future sacrifice on the part of Christ. The consequences of our unrestored sinning on earth are compensated in proportion to the mercifulness we have shown while on earth. And then follows the last part of Jas.2:13 which literally translated says: "Mercy or mercifulness boasts against judgment". This means that the believer whose life has been full of mercifulness will face the Judge unafraid because the Judge in His liberality will take into account the mercy that the believer demonstrated on earth as counteracting his failures and the consequences of his sin.

"Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God" (5:8, KJV). "Purity of heart" is not something that is achieved once and for all, but it is a continuous cleansing that the believer experiences as a result of the fulfilment of the previous conditions of blessedness. The more pure a person is, the more clear his sight of God comes.

"Everyone who has this hope in (Christ) purifies himself, just as He is pure" (1 Jn.3:3, NIV). "To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted" (Tit.1:15, NIV). "If a man cleanses himself from (wickedness), he will be an instrument for noble purposes, made holy, useful to the Master and prepared to do any good work. Flee the evil desires of youth, and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart" (2 Tim.2:21-22, NIV).

"..pure in heart" -- what is the "heart"? The heart, according to the Hebrews, is the centre of one being, including the mind, will, courage, motivations, action and emotions -- "the well-spring of life" (Pr.4:23, NIV). "You have filled my heart with greater joy.." (Ps.4:7a, NIV). This a better translation might be: "Blessed are those who are pure in their whole being, for they shall know God" (cp. Jn.17:3).

"Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God" (5:9, KJV). This is another scriptural passage that has often been misused. "Peacemaking" is not simply trying to stop the feuding between nations and people (which might be argued to be its secondary meaning), but bringing the peace of God that the believer has experienced to his fellow human beings (which is its primary meaning). As ever, we must consider if the peacemaking we are doing is bringing glory and honour to God or not.

In the Gulf War of 1991 "peace" was made with a tyrant before American public opinion forced a cessation of hostilities. The war ended in one way but in another the tyrant continued to oppress his people. Was a genuine peace made? In the same decade a "peace settlement" was brokered between Israel and several Arab nations in exchange for land for the Palestinians contrary to Israel's inheritance rights. Terrorist actions continued. Was that peacemaking? What if the Allies had negociated a "peace" with Hitler in 1943, offering a cessation of hostilities (and two years more slaughter) in exchange for Germany pulling out of the occupied territories? Would that have constituited "peacemaking"?

These questions are difficult, if not impossible, to answer to the satisfaction of everyone because the spiritual element is missing. The true "peacemakers" are those who bring God's peace through Jesus Christ to repentant sinners. The Old Testament prophesies of a time of world peace when the nations turn their swords into ploughshares but this is only the result of the mediation of the Spirit of God. Clearly stopping war and killing has some value even if the spiritual conditions are not ideal; however, such a process cannot be justified from Mt.5:9. A "forced peace", given time, can result in previously mortal enemies (like France and Germany) becoming friends.

It should be obvious that those who forced a peace settlement on Germany, Austria and Hungary in 1918 at the Treaties of Versailles, St.Germain and Trianon were not the "children of God". Their demands for impossible reparations showd no mercy (Mt.5:7) -- the purpose was revenge. Arguably (and Hitler seized this to justify his own tyrrany) the "peacemakers" so-called sowed the seeds of resentment, bitterness and hartred of the Second World War. Forgiveness (the proper Christian reaction, despite the appalling losses), might have prevented the 1939-45 holocaust. Clearely not all "peacemakers" are the "children of God" but only those who bring the reconciling love of Jesus Christ.

"Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" (Mt.5:10, KJV). "Persecution for righteousness' sake" causes a person to reach the highest rung of the satisfaction of blessedness, so much so that Jesus indicates that there is a double blessing by devoting two beattitudes to it:

"Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for My sake" (5:11, KJV). Here, then, is evidence of the blessedness of the believer who is living his religion truly -- he will have little peace in the outside world because he will be hated and persecuted. Which is an appropriate footnote to the seventh beattitude on peacemakers, showing that the kind of "peace" made by God's peacemakers is primarily (if not exclusively) inner peace.

"If we suffer, we shall also reign with Him: if we deny Him, He will also deny us" (2 Tim.2:11, KJV). In the face of suffering, the Christian may resist or may exercise patience. If he does exercise patience, then he will reign together with Christ. The believer's enjoyment in heaven will be enhanced proportionately to his patient endurance of suffering, sickness, and persecution in this life. He does have, however, the freedom to resist against the circumstances which God brings into his life which are not pleasant. If the believer denies Christ on this earth in claiming that God is unjust in bringing upon him unwanted circumstances, then the Lord will also deny him those rewards in heaven which he would otherwise deserve. This does not refer to a denial of entrance into heaven, even as the believer does not deny his faith, but only the privation of privileges and rewards even as the believer failed his Lord on earth.

If the Christian is not being slandered, reviled, accused of evil, and generally being persecuted then it is possible that he is living another gospel to the one Jesus taught. "Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword?" (Rom.8:35, NIV). Clearly the "health and wealth" "gospel", or the "crown for a cross" "gospel" of the so-called "Holy Spirit movement" has nothing to do with the doctrine of Christ. It is a false gospel.

"Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you" (5:12, KJV). When does this state of "blessedness" begin with the believer? It is not something to be experienced in the afterlife as the Greek's believed ("the eternal spring" of the Elysian fields), but it is something that begins the very moment that a person believes on Jesus Christ. This is demonstrated by the fact that the promise concerning the kingdom of heavens as in v.3 and v.10 is in the present tense whilst all the other promises are in the future. The fruits of one's obedience to the conditions of blessedness begin here, but they are not all given here. They will be given in their totality in the future, in heaven (v.12).

"..for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you" (5:12b, KJV). Those who enjoy the blessedness of Christ and His Torah (Law) as described in the beattitudes will hold a natural fellowship with the prophets from Old Testament times. Indeed they will feel as comfortable in their company in the next world as they do with their Christian brethren in this one. Thus in closing the Beatitudes Jesus signals that the New Covenant is but a continuation of the Old, as we shall see in vv.15-20.

There are many covenants described in the Bible, but I wonder how many Christians have heard of the Everlasting Covenant of Salt? Before we consider Jesus' continuing discourses we must understand exactly what this is:

"Whatever is set aside from the holy offerings the Israelites present to the Lord I give to you and your sons and daughters (the Levitical Priests and their families) as your regular share. It is an everlasting covenant of salt before the Lord both for you and your offspring" (Num.18:19, NIV). "Don't you know that the Lord, the God of Israel, has given kingship of Israel to David and his descendants forever by a covenant of salt?" (2 Chr.13:5, NIV).

"You are the salt of the earth (JNT, Land). But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men"(5:13, NIV).

Whom is Jesus addressing? Jewish talmidim (disciples/believers). Therefore the Jewish believers are the salt, a seasoning and a preservative. What are they preserving? The Land of Israel and the world (see v.5). They are seasoning for the Jewish people, the "righteous remnant" (Rom.11). God established a "covenant of salt" (Num.18:19), which is applied to King David and his descendants -- that is, to the Messiah, Jesus Christ (2 Chr.13:5). "..every one of you who does not renounce all that he has cannot be My talmid (disciple). Salt is excellent. But if even the salt becomes tasteless, what can be used to season it? It is fit neither for salt nor manure -- people throw it out. Those who have ears that can hear, let them hear!" (Lk.14:33-35, JNT).

Let us hear, then! Salt represents a person's willingness to do what Jesus demands of His disciples (Lk.14:26-33). But if his willingness turns into unwillingness -- if a disciple returns to worldly ways after experiencing the truth and joy of following God's way, what else is left to restore him? Nothing (see Heb.2:4-6).

Let us examine this more closely: "Behave wisely towards outsiders, making full use of every opportunity -- let your conversation always be gracious and interesting, so that you will know how to respond to any particular individual" (Col.4:5-6, JNT). The word "interesting" here literally means "seasoned with salt". The Word of God should never be dull or boring to outsiders if it is taught in the proper way. Unfortunately, there are many Christians who are themselves "dull, tedious and boring" because they are not seasoned with salt.

What, then, is this mysterious "salt"? What is it that we should "hear with our ears" (Jesus always uses this expression when He wishes to convey a hidden mystery)? In Lev.2:13 the salt that must accompany the grain offerings is called the "salt of the covenant" (NIV). According to Ez.43:24, salt is also to be sprinkled on burnt offerings, and Ex.30:35 specified salt as one of the ingredients in the special incense compounded for the sanctuary. A "covenant of salt" is an allusion to the salt used in the sacrificial meal that commonly accompanied the MAKING OF A COVENANT (see Gen.31:54; Ex.24:5-11; Ps.50:5).

Here the mystery is solved. Those who are the "salt of the earth" are those who have entered into binding covenants of Christian discipleship and are living them faithfully. But how can salt "lose its flavour"? And what does this mean?

The ancient Hebrews had access to an unlimited supply of salt from a place today called Jebel Usdum, a 15 square mile elevation at the south-west corner of the Dead Sea, an area traditionally associated with the fate of Lot's wife (Gen.19:26). Such salt was of the rock or fossil variety, and, because of impurities and the occurrence of chemical changes, the outer layer was generally lacking in flavour. The reference in Mt.5:13 is to this latter, much of which was discarded as worthless.

If the Christian allows impurities to enter his life then, like the salt at Jebel Usdum, he loses his spiritual flavour until he becomes worthless in the eyes of God. The process is slow and therefore not usually observable until it is too late. However, if the outer layer is cut off, then the inner core of pure salt is still of value. The covenants of holiness are the salt, and the impurities are the sins which we permit to progressively destroy our spiritual life.

Salt was often used amongst eastern peoples for ratifying agreements, so that salt becomes the symbol of fidelity and constancy. When Jesus calls His talmidim "salt" He is indicating that they have been true and faithful to their covenants, for which they will be blessed and inherit "the Land" -- Israel and the inner, Spiritual Land of the Kingdom of God. Under the Old Covenant, salt was used in the Levitical cereal offerings (Lev.2:13) as a preservative to typify the eternal nature of the "covenant of salt" exisiting between God and Israel (Num.18:19; 2 Chr.13:5) as mediated by the Priesthood. In the New Covenant, all true believers are priests and are themselves individually, and collectively as a community, "living salt" abiding "living covenants". When Elisha used salt to sweeten the brackish waters of the Jericho spring (2 Ki.2:19-22), he was symbolically indicating that a Christian enters into new and everlasting life only by entering into the covenants of the Messiah, Jesus Christ. "I have healed this water [the sinner]. Never again will it cause death [because of sin] or make the land [the inner spiritual life] unproductive" (v.21). The water of the covenants remains wholesome to this day (v.22).

When New Covenant Christians speak of believers entering into personal and collective, communal covenants, most Christians react negatively because the idea is unfamiliar to them.

There is a negative side of salt too, for not only is salt (positively) a flavouring and preservative, thus typifying covenants, but it was negatively used in ancient Israel to deliberately destroy productive land (as at Shechem) by sowing it with salt (Judg.9:45) as a token of perpetual desolation, for salt renders land infertile (Dt.29:23). The "parched places in the wilderness" (Jer.17:6) were synonymous with a barren salt land (Job 39:6). Thus to willfully violate sacred covenants is to render the soul barren and infertile to spiritual growth, just as to enter covenants for the wrong motives (in order to be made right with God) without having first received the New Birth is as destructive as salt thrown on the land.

The Qumran Community Settlement on the shores of the Salt Sea (known later as the "Dead Sea"), near where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, was anciently known as 'îr hammelah, or the City of Salt. The Qumran colony was a strict pre-Christian covenant fellowship of Jews, possibly of the Essene sect, who rejected the corrupt Priesthood in Jerusalem who did not belong to the legitimate Zadokian Priesthood line, and who were awaiting the coming of the Messiah. Many Essenes converted to Christianity before the remainder of the colony was destroyed by the Romans having first concealed their priceless scriptures in jars in local caves. Thanks to them we have the oldest Old Testament manuscripts known.Much could be said about the Salt Sea and the City of Salt as these are replete with spiritual symbolism but this is beyond the scope of the present work.

What are these Christian covenants that believers are supposed to enter into? They are the covenants of holiness stated in the Beattitudes! And what are they? (1) To be humble, dependent, vunerable -- to be "poor in spirit" (Mt.5:3); (2) To "mourn" -- to be sorrowful for sin and repent immediately we commit them (5:4) (3) To be "meek" -- gentle, humble, and mild (5:5); (4) To "hunger and thirst after righteousness" -- to seek to obey the commandments with all our hearts (5:6); (5) To be "merciful" -- to unconditionally forgive others of their wrong-doings to us (5:7); (6) To be "pure in heart" by pursuing a life of holiness (5:8); (7) To be "peacemakers" by bringing God's peace into others' lives through the Spirit that dwells in us (5:9); (8) To accept persecution, reviling and evil speech is a natural consequence of true discipleship (5:10-11); (9) To "rejoice and be exceedingly glad" knowing that we shall have fellowship with the prophets and patriarchs of old, and all those who have suffered for Christ's sake (5:12).

Most Christians are vaguely aware of the "New Covenant" though they often confuse it with the "New Testament" and have not usually considered what it means to enter the New Covenant except that they have some very generalised ideas about "having faith in Christ". They are, moreover, usually blinded by all the false theology that is in circulation about Israel, the Old Testament, the Law of Moses (Torah), etc.. But here we have Jesus teaching us just what He expects His disciples to do in order to be "interesting", "fruitful" and "spiritually productive".

We might perhaps re-translate Mt.5:13 as follows: "You are the children of the Covenant of Holiness [salt of the Land/theocratic community]; but if you have broken your covenants of holiness (or, almost as bad, not entered into them at all) [if the salt has lost its flavour], how can you be made holy again [made salty again]? You are no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out [of the covenant community] and trampled by men [being no use to yourselves or anyone else].

The taking of covenants, and faithfulness to them, is what gives New Covenant Christians their "flavour" and it is what "preserves" them in times of persecution. Never has a New Covenant Christian who has been true to his covenants ever fled persecution or run away from the light.

"You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on a stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven" (5:14-16, NIV).

This is a continuation of Jesus' teaching on salt. Of the Jews the Lord said: "..I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring My salvation to the ends of the earth" (Isa.49:6b, NIV). Just as the Jews were the "salt of the Land", so also are they the "light for the Gentiles." Judaism, however, never encompassed the whole world, and this reference can only refer to Christian Hebrews. The 12 Apostles were all Christian Hebrews (Messianic Jews). Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles, took the Gospel Light out of Eretz-Israel to Europe and Asia. It has since spread to Africa and America too.

Unfortunately, the original Hebrew Christianity has become throughly Hellenised (combined with Greek culture; since then its has "adapted" itself to nearly every culture in the world making Christian churches very unlike one another). Attempts by groups like Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses have failed to restore the original Hebrew Christian Gospel but are usually variations of the cultures that spawned them (in the Mormon case, North American). The varieties of Christianity planted in Africa, for example, have usually been "Europeanised" because of the European missionaries who founded them, but have now become "Africanised". Christianity which has spread itself in China has become "Chinese", and so on. Many Christians view this polychromatic Church with favour and believe that Christianity should adapt itself to local cultures and customs.

This is not, however, the teaching of Jesus. Christianity and the Land of Israel are essentially indivisible. When the original Church was driven out of Israel by the Romans, it quickly lost its Hebrew roots, became gentilised, and anti-semitic, partly because of false apocryphal New Testament writings like the Epistle of Barnabas. The main churches and denominations -- Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Protestant -- are basically incomplete, muddy Gentile versions of the original Hebrew Gospel. Fatally combining worldly politics with the Church, the Gospel rapidly became corrupted. Today we see former "Christian" nations actually returning to their natural, pagan, neo-Greek roots. Not only is the Church becoming more and more separated from the secular state (as is right), but Christianity itself is dividing into two camps -- the one "wordly Christianity" -- saltless and without light -- and the other slowly but surely moving in the direction of neo-Hebrew Christianity -- a Christianity struggling to find its Hebrew roots. The division is continuing as this commentary is being written -- a small part of Christendom is hungering and thirsting after the original Gospel of the Hebrew Apostles and not the polluted one which even now is dying. Unfortunately the seeking Christians do not know quite what it is they are searching for -- they are not sure yet what the "salt" is though they are slowly beginning to find out by trial and error. It is at this juncture that the New Covenant Church of God has a message of hope, bringing as it does a restoration message and a fresh revelation for the 21st century.

We have maintained that the Sermon of the Mount is a complete whole and not a collection of sayings from different times and places as Luke's Gospel is (Matthew was an eye-witness; Luke was not). We have already seen how the Beatitudes flow naturally into Jesus "Salt and Light" Discourse. Now He speaks directly about what He has been hinting at all along -- that the Old Covenant Torah (Law) is about to be brought to completion (and not abolished, as false modern theology teaches).

"Don't think that I have come to abolish the Torah (Law) or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish but to COMPLETE. Yes, indeed, I tell you that until heaven and earth pass away, not so much as a yud or a stroke will pass from the Torah -- not until everything that must happen has happened. So whoever disobeys the least of these mitzvot(commandments) and teaches others to do so will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But whoever obeys them and so teaches will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness is far greater than that of the Torah-teachers (scribes) and P'rushim (Pharisees), you will certainly not enter the Kingdom of Heaven!" (Mt.5:17-20, JNT).

With six sentences, Jesus dismisses all churches and denominations as "least in the Kingdom of Heaven" who say that the Law (Torah) has been abolished by Christ and who therefore do not seek to enthusiastically obey all of God's commandments.

The Hebrew word "Torah" means "teaching or doctrine" and is rendered in both the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) and in the New Testament by the Greek word nomos, which means "law". Greek has had a more direct and pervasive influence on English and other European languages than Hebrew has, and this is why in most languages one speaks of the "Law" of Moses rather than the "Teaching" of Moses. It is also part of the reason why the Torah has mistakenly come to be thought of by Christians as legalistic in character. See Rom.3:20; Gal.3:23 in European editions and compare these with the JNT which renders the correct sense:

"For in His sight no one alive will be considered righteous on the ground of legalistic observance of Torah commands, because what Torah really does is show people how sinful they are" (Rom.3:20, JNT).

"Now before the time for this trusting faithfulness came, we were imprisoned in subjection to the system which results from perverting the Torah into legalism, kept under guard until this yet-to-come trusting faithfulness would be revealed" (Gal.3:22, JNT).

In Judaism the word "Torah" may mean:

(1) Chumash (the Pentateuch, the five books of Moses); or
(2) That plus the Prophets and the Writings, i.e. the Tanakh (known by Christians as the "Old Testament" -- see Mt.4:4-10);
(3) That plus the Oral Torah, which includes the Talmud and other legal materials; or
(4) That plus all religious instructions from the rabbis, including ethical and aggadic (homiletical) materials.

Here it means the first of these, since "the Prophets" are mentioned separately.

What, then, is the New Covenant Torah? It is, for New Covenant Christians:

(1) The whole Bible -- "Old" and "New Testaments" -- the New Covenant primary Canon;
(2) That, plus the secondary Canon consisting of the (a) Letters of the Sub-Apostolic Fathers (Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp), some of the Apocrypha (e.g. Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom of Solomon, Tobit), parts of the Hebrew Pseudepigrapha (e.g. the Testaments of the 12 Patriarchs, Joseph & Asenath), and (b) the modern-day Revelations of the New Covenant, the modern-day Epistles of the 12 Apostles, etc.;
(3) That plus the Oral New Covenant Torah, which would include the inspired sermons of the Apostolate and other New Covenant Christians, the Church Constitution,etc.;
(4) That plus all the religious instruction of the New Covenant apostles, prophets and teachers.

Though in this context Jesus is referring to the Pentateuch, His inclusion of "the Prophets" (with a capitalised P) (as in Mt.7:12; 22:40; Lk.16:16,28,31; 24:44; Jn.1:45; 6:45; Ac.13:15,27,40; 15:15; 24:14; 28:23; Rom.3:21), refers to the second of the three main parts of the Tanakh (Old Testament). When the Tanakh prophets as persons are referred to, the word is not capitalised; "prophet" in the singular sense is never capitalised. By mentioning both the Torah and the Prophets Jesus is saying that He has not come to modify or replace God's Word, the Tanakh (Old Testament) -- Cp. Lk.24:44-45. Rather, He has come to complete it.

The Greek word for "to complete" is plêrôsai, literally, "to fill"; the usual rendering in European Bibles here is "to fulfill" (see ASV, KJV, NIV, RSV, LB, Norwegian 1988; TEV/GNB has, "make their teachings come true"; but S&G & RBV have the correct sense, "to complete"). Replacement theology, which wrongly teaches that the Church has replaced the Jews as God's people (see commentary on Mt.5:5), understands this verse wrongly in two ways:

(1) Jesus' "fulfilling" the Torah is thought to mean that it is unnecessary for people to fulfill it now. But there is no logic to the proposition that Jesus' obeying the Torah does away with our need to obey it. In fact Paul, whose object in his letter to the Romans is to foster "the obedience that comes from trusting" in Jesus, teaches that such trusting does not abolish Torah but confirms it (Rom.1:5; 3:31, JNT);

(2) With identical lack of logic, Jesus' "fulfilling" the Prophets is thought to imply that no prophecies from the Old Testament remain for the Jews. But the Hebrew Bible's promises to the Jews are not abolished in the name of being "fulfilled in Jesus". Rather, fulfillment in Jesus is an added assurance that everything God has promised the Jews will yet come to pass (see 2 Cor.1:20).

It is true that Jesus kept the Torah perfectly and fulfilled predictions of the Prophets, but that is not the point here. Jesus did not come to abolish but "to make full" (plêrôsai) the meaning of what the Torah and the ethical demands of the Prophets require. Thus he came to complete our understanding of the Torah and the Prophets, so that we can try more effectively to be and do what they say to be and do. Verses 18-20 enunciate three ways in which the Torah and the Prophets remain necessary, applicable and in force. The remainder of Chapter 5 gives six specific cases in which Jesus explains the fuller spiritual meaning of points in the Jewish Law. In fact, this verse states the theme and the agenda of the entire Sermon on the Mount, in which Jesus completes, makes fuller, the understanding of His talmidim (disciples) concerning the Torah and the Prophets, so that they can more fully express what being God's people is all about.

The Anglican (Church of England) Christian writer Brigid Younghuges supports this understanding:

"'...I came not to destroy, but to fulfil.' And surely 'to fulfil' means to complete, in the sense of bringing to perfection, not, as Christians have all too often interpreted it, to render obsolete; to fulfil in such a way as to perfect a foundation on which to build further." (Christianity's Jewish Heritage, West Sussex: Angel Press, 1988, p.8).

As if to underline His point, Jesus then says: "Yes indeed!" Except at the end of prayers, "Yes indeed" (NIV, "I tell you the truth", KJV, "For verily, verily I say unto you") and "Yes" may be used to render the Greek amên (which transliterates the Hebrew 'amen). The Hebrew root '-m-n means "truth, faithfulness", which is why the Hebrew word 'amen means "It is true, so be it, may it become true" -- hence its use in English as well as Hebrew by those listening to a prayer. A speaker's "Amen" to his own prayer is itself superfluous, yet useful as a cue to others to respond with "Amen" (see Mt.6:13; Rom.1:25; 9:5; 11:36).

In any case, Hebrew 'amen is always used in reference to something previously said. But most versions translate it as if it pointed forward rather than back! Thus to be specific, Jesus' "Amen" to Hismelf emphasises His own previous point, sometimes with the force, "You may not think that I really meant what I said, but I do!" (Mt.5:26; 6:2,5,16; 10:15,42; 13:17; 18:18; 23:36; 24:34,47; 26:13). His "Amen" to what someone else has said can be acknowledgement conveying the sense, "I recognise the problem" (Mt.19:28) or even ironic in tone, "Your question/answer shows me that at last you're beginning to catch on!" (Mt.21:21,31), "You can't be serious!" (Mt.25:12) or "How I wish it were so (but it isn't)!" (Mt.26:34). Sometimes after a speech, or even after an event, it calls attention to what just happened, conveying things like, "That was amazing! Did you notice?" (Mt.8:10) or, "Not what you expected, is it?" (a beautiful example at Mt.18:3); at Mt.19:23 it amounts to a sigh; at Mt.25:40,45 the King's "Amen" means, "You are astounded that things are working out this way, but that's how it is"; at Mt.26:21 Jesus' "Amen" means, "Right now you are relaxed and comfortable, but I have news for you!". And sometimes Jesus' "Amen" is simply affirmative ("I agree") but becomes the take-off for His own reinforcing or contrasting remarks (several of the above examples, and Mt.8:13, where His "Amen" means, "I agree with your unspoken answer to my rhetorcal question"). See also Rev.7:11-12.

We see, then in these first 20 verses of the Sermon on the Mount, a condensed introduction to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Looking backwards (since Jesus' "Amen" not only embraces what He said about the Torah ("Law") but the Beatitudes as well), we get a clear picture of a Gospel which has been almost completely lost from Gentile Christendom. Since the Reformers we have been told that the Torah or Old Testament Teaching (Law) has been "fulfilled" -- abolished -- in Christ, and that all we must do is live by faith. But Jesus definitely contradicts such a position by adding, "You may not think that I really meant what I just said about the Torah, but I do!" For centuries Protestants have not believed and have tried to dismiss Jesus' sayings because they were afraid of creating another legalistic perversion like the one they had just cast off. Their fear was understandable but not justified.

For too long the children of the Reformation have been putting all their hope on such falsely translated passages as Gal.2:16a which in modern versions reads: "We who are Jews by birth know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ" (NIV) when it ought to read: