Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 48:190 (Apr 1891)
Article: “The Gospel In The Sermon On The Mount”
Author: Alfred H. Hall

BSac 48:190 (April 1891) p. 322

“The Gospel In The Sermon On The Mount”

Alfred H. Hall

The paper which is here presented may be called a “study” of the Sermon on the Mount, just as an outline drawing in an artist’s portfolio is called “a study.” Nothing more than this is contemplated. Even within this definition, a single question is before us, as suggested in the above heading: What is the relation of the Sermon on the Mount to the doctrine of salvation?

It is assumed, at the start, that the accounts of Matthew and Luke are identical. Augustine contended that Christ first delivered the more complete discourse, as recorded by Matthew, on the mount. Then he descended to the plain and gave the shorter discourse, as recorded by Luke. But the verdict of the majority of scholars is, without doubt, the true one, that Luke reports the substance of the discourse which Matthew gives at length. The occasion on which it was spoken, was the election of the twelve. It is addressed primarily to the disciples, but also to the people at large. The object of the sermon has been set forth in a variety of ways. The Fathers taught that it was an “amplification of the Mosaic law.” Augustine calls it, in the introduction to his commentary, “a perfect standard of the Christian life as regards the highest morals.” In De Wette’s definition, it is a “compendium of Christ’s doctrine.” Meyer calls the sermon, “the inaugural address of Christ’s kingdom.” According to Oswald Dykes, it is “the manifesto of the king.” Tholuck names it, “the Magna Charta of the new kingdom.”

BSac 48:190 (April 1891) p. 323

With these definitions in mind, it should be said, earliest of all, that one may make the mistake of seeing too little in this sermon, or the equally serious mistake of seeing too much. One sees too little if he discovers in it only an enlargement of the Mosaic law. No error has been more common than this. Christ’s teaching has been studied retrospectively. It has been placed alongside the teaching of Moses so as to show simply the fulness of the New as compared with the Old. The look has been backward, and not forward. Thus many have seen only a fulfilment of what had been taught and believed. They have failed to see a prophecy of what was to be taught and believed.

This mistake of seeing too little in Christ’s sermon has been made by those who in their interpretation of the character and work of Christ are altogether at variance. The rationalist has found in it a masterpiece of practical morality, “the finest relic,” says one, “of the purer type of Christ’s doctrine.” So exalted was its morality seen to be that the early English deists used to quote it as a proof of how “impracticable was the Christian re...