Do the devout read it much anyway—and take it seriously?
When we hear the words, Sermon on the Mount, we might be tempted to think it’s the pinnacle of moral teaching. Well, that’s been the church hype for centuries, but this doesn’t quite match reality. And does anybody ask the daring question: “Are these really the words of Jesus?” Since the gospel of Mark, by widespread scholarly consensus, was the first written, it’s a major puzzle indeed that the author was unaware of these supposed words of Jesus. The major thrust of Mark’s gospel is the expected arrival—very soon! —of the kingdom of god on earth. At Jesus’ trial, described in Mark 14, he promises those attending that they would see him coming on the clouds of heaven (v. 62). The author was dead wrong about this, which was his obsession—hence his gospel is lacking in moral teachings.
When Matthew wrote his gospel, he copied so much of Mark’s gospel, and decided to add the Sermon on the Mount to make up for this deficiency. In reality, however, he created Jesus-script to suit his purposes. Richard Carrier offers a solid critique of this addition to Matthew’s gospel, describing it as:
“…a well-crafted literary work that cannot have come from some illiterate Galilean. In fact, we know it originated in Greek, not Hebrew or Aramaic, because it relies on the Septuagint text of the Bible for all its features and allusions. It relies extensively on the Greek text of Deuteronomy and Leviticus especially, and in key places on other texts. For example, the section on turning the other cheek and other aspects of legal pacifism (Mt. 5.38-42) has been redacted from the Greek text of Isa. 50.6-9. These are not the words of Jesus. This famous sermon as a whole also has a complex literary structure that can only have come from a writer, not an everyday speaker.” (On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt, pp. 465-466)
When the author of Luke created his gospel—also copying major portions of Mark—he wasn’t all that pleased with Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount. He modified it significantly—which we’ll consider shortly—and said that it was preached at “a level place.” The author of John’s gospel ignored the sermon altogether, but instead created huge chunks of Jesus-script not found anywhere else.
Any devout lay person who takes up the challenge to really study these problems can see that the gospels fail big time as inspired words from their deity. Most of the laity—if they are honest—will admit there is far too much in the Sermon on the Mount that they do not agree with at all. Here are a few items they would most likely disavow.
· It’s not uncommon for devout Christians to claim that the teachings of Jesus overrule the barbarities we find in the Old Testament, but in Matthew 5:17-20 Jesus warns that not one bit of law in the ancient scripture can be ignored. It would appear that Matthew saw the new Jesus cult as the inheritor of Jewish law and custom.
· Worship is null and void if you have disagreements with other members of the congregation. In Matthew 5:23-24 we find this demand: “…when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift.” The church has splintered into thousands of different brands precisely because this command has been ignored: the devout seem determined to cherish their disagreements. I was pastor of two congregations, and it didn’t take long to figure out the rival factions, indeed, the hatreds that caused tensions.
· Adultery is condemned—nothing wrong with that. But then we read Matthew 5:28: “But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” So it would appear that just being sexually aroused is also out of bounds morally. We can be sure many of the devout would mutter, “Oh please, give me a break.”
· And they might have the same reaction when they read Matthew 5:32: “…whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” That’s not how reality works in our modern world.
· According to Matthew 5:33-37, swearing by oath is forbidden. Ironically, when testifying in court, witnesses are asked to pledge, by oath, to tell the truth—with their hand on a Bible! Presidents are also required to swear by oath to uphold the constitution.
· “Turn the other cheek” is a well-known line, but the full text, Matthew 5:39-42 is not good advice at all: “Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also, and if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, give your coat as well, and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Give to the one who asks of you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.” Do not resist an evildoer. How would Hitler have been defeated if the world followed such advice?
· Matthew 5 come to an end with the order to “love your enemies”—with this final verse 48: “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” Obviously, such a goal is beyond reach, and is a give-away that Matthew’s author was nurturing cult fanaticism.
· In Matthew 6 we find the Lord’s Prayer, but the first two verses especially are defective: “Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.” This shows no awareness at all of the cosmos as we know it today. How can it possibly be appropriate to assign a human gender role to a creator god, and state that he can be found in heaven—which was, at that time, believed to be above the clouds and below the moon? At that time, gods were believed to be male or female, but claiming that god is male has nurtured misogyny for centuries. It is also mindless flattery to remind a god that its name is hallowed or holy. Why would a god need to be told that? And the gospel’s author was sure of the promise that god’s kingdom was about to appear on earth—where his will would be done, finally—as it is in heaven. Two thousand years later, no such kingdom has arrived on earth.
· In Matthew 6:19-21, the Jesus-script warns against storing up treasures on earth; instead store up treasures in heaven. How can this text be welcomed by devout folks today who are consumer driven? Indeed, the Christmas season is an orgy of consumerism. They must have long lists of earthly treasure they need/want. Do they have comparable lists of heavenly treasures?
· In Matthew 6:25-33 we find a long text warning against worrying about what to eat, drink, or wear. Such worry is unnecessary because god will provide: “And why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not clothed like one of these.” (vv. 28-29) There is probably no text in the Sermon on the Mount that is ignored more than this one.
· Matthew 7:1-5 is a stern warning against judging others. “Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye but do not notice the log in your own eye?” (v. 3) Throughout the centuries Christians have ignored this advice. They have harshly judged others of different races, nationalities, genders, and sexual orientation. And it continues to be a plague on life in the world today.
Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount concludes with the claim that following these rules will be like the person who builds his house on rock, not on sand. “And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not act on them will be like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell—and great was its fall!” (vv. 26-27) Matthew concludes by boosting the reputation of his cult: “Now when Jesus had finished saying these words, the crowds were astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority and not as their scribes.” (vv. 28-29)
What did Luke do with this famous sermon?
Luke shortened it, deleted some of the beatitudes, and changed the wording. Even though the gospels of Matthew and Luke are side by side in the New Testament, do the devout compare them carefully? A very handy tool for this exercise is called Gospel Parallels, books that print texts—from Matthew and Luke, as well as Mark and John—side by side. The contradictions, changes, goofs, become quite obvious. I still use Synopsis of the Four Gospels (1982), edited by Kurt Aland. The “divinely inspired” bragging takes a direct hit when these documents are carefully analyzed and compared. There is substantial irony here. Such study can help even the devout to snap out of it!
David Madison was a pastor in the Methodist Church for nine years, and has a PhD in Biblical Studies from Boston University. He is the author of Ten Tough Problems in Christian Thought and Belief: a Minister-Turned-Atheist Shows Why You Should Ditch the Faith, now being reissued in several volumes:
· Guessing About God (2023),
· Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (2021). The Spanish translation of this book is also available
· Everything You Need to Know About Prayer But May Not Want to Admit (2025)
His YouTube channel is here. At the invitation of John Loftus, he has written for the Debunking Christianity Blog since 2016.
The Cure-for-Christianity Library©, now with more than 500 titles, is here. A brief video explanation of the Library is here.
No comments:
Post a Comment