Posted on by rschut1945

Summary of the Sermon on the Mount

After reading the Sermon on the Mount you might be thinking to yourself that no one can achieve the perfection that Jesus teaches here, but if you are thinking this, you are missing the point.  We are not here to judge ourselves or others as to whether we are perfect or not, but whether we really love the one who is perfect.  Paul understood exactly what Jesus was teaching and reflected it in his writings to the Philippians:

Philippians 3:12-14 (KJV)
12Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
14I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

We are called to strive toward the upward call of God in Christ.  The truth remains that we cannot accomplish the goals set for us in this sermon by our own willpower nor achieve it by the use of self-help books.  But such weakness is not an excuse for our failure. Realizing this brings us much closer to understanding Jesus’ teaching.  What Jesus expects from us is to love the character that he just described in his sermon.  This character is, in fact, a profile of Jesus himself.  If we say that we believe in Jesus, this is the Jesus that we must believe in.  This is the true Jesus who lifts us out of sin by his own character through love.

The Sermon on the Mount cannot and should not be reduced to one idea or simplified into a cliché. It is complex and speaks to us differently at different levels at different times in our lives.  Today, many have taken Jesus’ teachings and transformed them into a behavioral psychology in order to satisfy man’s psychological needs. We see this frequently when pastors take the words of Jesus and conform them into motivational techniques in order to publish best-selling Christian self-help books.  These are mere imitations of the true teachings of Jesus. We must understand that what started out as divine teaching has now been transformed, conformed, and finally adapted to the needs of humanity as a technique to improve the quality of life and not the divine teaching of God that brings eternal salvation.

Posted on by rschut1945

The Philosophical Trend of the Church

During the early years of the Christian church many of its theologians and bishops were influenced by their training in philosophy when they began to create the doctrine of the church. It was at this time that Tertullian (c. 160 – c. 225 AD), a polemicist against heresy, made the comment “What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem?”

His concern was that theology was becoming based too much upon philosophical ideals and not enough upon the Scriptures—what he called the Rule of Faith. He considered philosophy to be a form of paganism and something that did not mix well with faith. He did, however, use the tools of philosophy in his argumentation, but did not base his beliefs upon them.

The pattern that Tertullian saw in the late 2nd century existed throughout the history and development of the church. We can see the influences of both Plato and Aristotle in the thinking of the church fathers as well as many theologians to follow. This pattern continued during the time of the Enlightenment when philosophy seemed to be at its heights. And we still see this pattern continue through Modernism and into the Post-modern world.

These various forms of philosophy have had a dramatic and lasting impact upon the church’s theologians that extended into the beliefs of the church itself. Today, if we look carefully, we can see the effects of Post-modern thinking upon the average church-goer who has little experience in Biblical training and who is looking for simple answers to complex questions. Even pastors are assimilating today’s philosophical idealism into their sermons and teaching materials.

We need to rethink this trend and once again ask, “What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem?”

What do you think?