Longhenry/Billingsley Debate on The Sermon on the Mount
Dan Billingsley’s Third Affirmative
Proposition: The Scriptures teach that the "Sermon on the Mount," Matthew chapters 5 through 7, is
exclusively Old Testament doctrine
Affirm: Dan Billingsley
Deny: Ethan Longhenry
Dan Billingsly's 3rd Affirmative: I am disappointed in Ethan's weak argumentation, but this is to be expected of one
who has such a sectarian view of the Bible. Ethan complains that I do not address the "sermon on the mount" in this
affirmative. Can he not count? I have addressed Matthew, chapters 5 through 7, several hundred times.
Now to Ethan's questions.
Ethan asks:
"ELDV: I will ask you this directly then: When Jesus says that "for this is the Law and the Prophets" in Matthew 7:12,
is He referring to the statement He made in verse 12 (the "Golden Rule") or does He refer to the whole discussion
held previously?"
Dan's Answer: In Matthew 7:12, Jesus is referring to all of the teaching in Matthew, chapters 5 through 7. Jesus
declares in this verse that all of his teaching in the "sermon on the mount" is "the law and the prophets."
Ethan claims:
"ELDV: I find it highly interesting that although I asked for specific references from the Old Testament "Law" and
"Prophets" that prove that Jesus' six comments are Old Testament doctrine, Dan now asks me to prove that the six
statements are from the New Testament. Unfortunately for Dan, there are many specific references in the New
Testament for Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount!
Dan's response: Sad, but Ethan does not find these six comments in the New Testament of Acts 2 through
Revelation 22. Ethan wants me to find the six comments "word for word" in the Old Testament, but when I ask him to
find these six comments in the New Testament all he gives us unrelated scripture. Ethan, our readers can see
through your response.
Ethan's question:
"ELDV: I would like to see the evidence that proves beyond a doubt that "each book, chapter and verse belongs to
one specific covenant and covenant age?" I do not believe I have read that in the Scriptures. If each book belongs to
the same covenant, and you teach that Acts 2-22 is the "New Covenant" and Acts 1 is the "Old Covenant," have you
not just contradicted yourself?
Dan's answer: Poor Ethan, he can't get anything right! I have never stated that "...each book belongs to the same
covenant..." To stay in the debate, Ethan has to conjure up false statements and credit them to me. Ethan, that is a
"No, No" for a Christian. I have always taught that the different covenants of the Bible can "begin" in the middle of
one book (for example the old Mosaical covenant "began" in Exodus 20, and can end in another book (the old
Mosaical covenant "ended" in Matthew 27, Mark 15, Luke 23 and John 19. Ethan is not a careful reader.
Ethan wrote,
"Dan then asserts the following: 3. The six chapters of Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, John 20, 21and Acts 1
describe the fifty day period of time between the Old and New Testaments. This was a period when no covenant for
justification and salvation from sin existed between God and man.
There was NO covenant between God and man during this period? So if a man were to die at this time, he would be
without any form of covenant with God? Where is this taught?
I believe this clearly shows the difficulty with Dan's premise-- in his desire to draw lines in the sand, there is a gap
that leaves many souls without any hope! Perhaps there is a period of "covenantal overlap," exemplified in Acts 21?
Dan's answer: In my last affirmative I made the following statement: "3. The six chapters of Matthew 28, Mark 16,
Luke 24, John 20, 21and Acts 1 describe the fifty day period of time between the Old and New Testaments. This was
a period when no covenant for justification and salvation from sin existed between God and man."
If the Old Testament Mosaical age and covenant "ended" at the cross (Rom. 10:4), and the New Testament did not
"begin" until Acts 2, then the above statement is true according to the teaching of the Scriptures.
At the cross and death of Christ, God "cast away" Israel as his Old Covenant nation as Christ prophesied (Matt.
21:43), and as Paul teaches in the New Testament (Rom. 11:15). All 1st century Jews lost their Old Testament
covenant with God at the cross and all Jews at that time lost their old covenant relationship with God. At the cross,
all Jews became "alien sinners" with the non-covenant Gentiles. The whole world became "guilty" of sin at that time,
there were none "righteous" by covenant law (Rom. 3:19). The 1st century Jews became "alienated" from God, they
joined the millions of Gentiles who had for more than 1500 years been without covenant, without God and without
hope in the world (Eph. 2:12). There was no covenant hope between the cross and Acts 2. Ethan is wrong again.
Ethan asks:
"ELDV: Dan first says that Jesus is contrasting the "true Law of Moses" with the rabbinical traditions and then uses
those same traditions to define the term "some uncleanness!" Is this not hypocritical on his account? Where in the
Old Testament is "some uncleanness" defined, Dan?
Dan's answer: No, Ethan, I did not say that the false "rabbinical traditions" defined `ervah dabar' (some uncleanness)
in Deuteronomy 24:1-2. I said that Jesus defined "some uncleanness" as "sexual immorality" or "fornication" as he
taught the truth of the law of Moses in Matthew 19. Jesus defined "ervah dabar" as "sexual immorality" just as Moses
did in Leviticus, chapters 18 through 20.
Ethan is now attempting to draw attention away from the proposition and get into the marriage, divorce and
remarriage controversy. I will not let him do so.
Ethan asks:
How come Jeremiah speaks of women that have been divorced and yet remarry, and the only defilement comes
when the original husband wishes to have her back?
Dan's answer: Because that was the teaching of the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 24:1-4.
Ethan asks:
Finally, how can Moses and Jesus teach the same doctrine when Jesus says that MOSES, not the Pharisees, not the
Sadducees, nor the scribes, but MOSES suffered them to divorce their wives, and from the beginning it had not been
so?
Dan answers: "From the beginning" refers to the time of Genesis 2, when there was a marriage law but no sin against
marriage or divorce. The only law for divorce and marriage has been and is given only in covenant law (Deut. 24:1-4;
1 Cor. 7:27-28). Now to the 3rd affirmative.
Argument 11: Comparisons Between The Law of Moses And "The Sermon On The Mount"
When we compare the teachings revealed by Moses and the earlier prophets (in the books of Exodus 20 through
Malachi 4) with the teachings of Christ in "the sermon on the mount," we will immediately recognize that they are
identical in principle and law. In Matthew, chapters 5 through 7, Jesus is restating the old covenant principles of
righteousness from the law of Moses -- and applying them to that last generation of old covenant Jews. He is not
setting forth new New Testament doctrine to be applied to men in this New Testament age!
Although there is a similarity in the moral and ethical teaching of the old and new covenant, this similarity does not
mean that we can bind the Old Testament law of Moses, the faith and practice of Old Testament religion of "the
sermon on the mount," in this New Testament age. Consider these comparisons.
| PRINCIPLE | O.T. LAW OF MOSES | Sermon/ Mount
|
| Humility | 2 Chron.7:14 | Matt. 5:3
|
| Penitence | Deut.4:29; 5:29 | Matt. 5:4
|
| Meekness | Ps. 149:4; Zeph.2:3 | Matt. 5:5
|
| Spiritual Desire | 2Chron.15:15; Ps.38:9 | Matt. 5:6
|
| Mercy | Deut.10:12-22;Mic.6:8 | Matt. 5:7
|
| Purity of Heart | Ps. 24:4; Isa. 38:3 | Matt. 5:8
|
| Peacemaker | Ex. 20:24; Eccl. 10:14 | Matt. 5:9
|
| Persecution | Ps.35:3;Heb. 11:32-40 | Matt. 5:10
|
| Suffering | Kings19:1-3;Esth.3:13 | Matt. 5:11-12
|
| Light-Salt | Ex. 19:4-6; Ps.119:105 | Matt. 5:13-16
|
| Fulfillment-Prophecy | Deut. 18:15 | Matt. 5:17-20
|
| Murder | Ex. 20:13; Lev.24:17 | Matt. 5:21
|
| Anger | Ps. 37:8; Eccl. 7:9 | Matt. 5:22
|
| Forgiveness | Ex. 32:32; Num. 14:19 | Matt. 5:23-26
|
| Lust-Adultery | Ex.20:14,17;1Sam.25:28 | Matt. 5:27-30
|
| Divorce | Deut. 24:1; 7:3 | Matt. 5:31-32
|
| Oaths | Ex. 20:7; Deut. 6:13 | Matt. 5:33-37
|
| Revenge | Lev. 19:18 | Matt. 5:38-42
|
| Brotherly Love | Lev. 19:18 | Matt. 5:43-48
|
| Alms Giving | Deut.15:7-11;Lev.25:35 | Matt. 6:1-4
|
| Prayer | Num. 11:2; 1Sam. 1:10 | Matt. 6:5-15
|
| Fasting | Ex. 34:28; 1 Sam. 7:6 | Matt. 6:16-18
|
| Covetousness | Ex. 20:17 | Matt. 6:19-21
|
| Spiritual Blindness | Isa. 6:9-10; 59:10 | Matt. 6:22-23
|
| Worldliness | Deut. 7:1-26 | Matt. 6:24
|
| Divine Providence | Deut.28-30;Isa. 25:4 | Matt. 6:25-34
|
| Judgment | Isa. 29:20; Prov. 17:9 | Matt. 7:1-5
|
| Benevolence | Deut.15:12-14;Isa.58:7 | Matt. 7:6-12
|
| Two Ways | Deut. 28:1-68 | Matt. 7:13-14
|
| False Prophets | Deut. 13:5; 18:22 | Matt. 7:15-20
|
| Faith-Messiah | Deut. 18:18 | Matt. 7:21-23
|
| Obedience | Deut. 5:29 | Matt. 7:24-27
|
Because both the Old and New covenants relate together in the same divine scheme of redemption, they will
naturally contain some similarities in "principles" of righteousness, the worship of God and morality, but the
covenants are quite different in "faith" and the "practice" of religion. Both covenants teach faith in the same God;
both teach essentially the same morality and the same general law for marriage, but they do teach different laws for
divorce and remarriage; and both teach each covenant "kingdom" to have faith in eternity. However, while some
similarities exist, the old covenant religion of "the ten commandments" and "the sermon on the mount" revealed in
Exodus 20 through Matthew 27, Mark 15, Luke 23 and John 19 -- before the cross , is not to be confused with
Christ's new covenant religion as revealed in Acts 2 through Revelation 22 -- after the cross.
We cannot bind the old covenant teachings of the law of Moses in "the sermon on the mount" on men in this New
Testament age for the same reason that we cannot bind the old covenant teachings of the "the ten commandments"
from Exodus 20. Today, the New Testament church should keep and practice the principles of righteousness
revealed in the true New Testament teaching of Christ in Acts 2 through Revelation 22 -- not those old covenant
commands and principles of the Old Testament law of Moses revealed in "the sermon on the mount" in Matthew 5-7.
Because each of the "principles" taught by Jesus in "the sermon on the mount" were already revealed to Israel in the
law of Moses (Exodus 20 through Malachi 4), these were not new "principles" of commandments for morality and
righteousness that were unknown to the Jews. In truth, while the covenant "faith" and "practice" of religion, and how
one attains "righteousness," has changed from covenant to covenant (Rom. 1:17), but the principles of God's
morality and righteousness have not changed from the beginning.
Therefore, the same basic "principles" of morality and righteousness are common to all covenants between God and
man. However, let us remember, the similarity of morality and righteousness in the two covenants does not mean
that we can bind the commands for old covenant "faith," "practice" and "righteousness" of the law of Moses in "the
sermon on the mount" in this new covenant age.
Argument 12: A Comparison Of "Principles" From Old Testament Law Of Moses And "The Sermon On The Mount"
Let us show, by several comparisons, that the principles for Old Testament "faith" and the practice of "religion"
which Jesus taught in "the sermon on the mount" were a restatement of the truth in the law of Moses -- not the
revelation of New Testament doctrine.
The principle of HUMILITY.
THE LAW OF MOSES: "If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek
my face, , and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their
land" (2 Chron. 7:14).
THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT: "Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of God" (Matt. 5:3).
The principle of MERCY.
THE LAW OF MOSES: "He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to
do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?" (Micah 6:8; see also Deut. 10:12-22).
THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT: "Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy" (Matt. 5:7).
The principle of PURITY OF HEART.
THE LAW OF MOSES: "Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? or who shall stand in his holy place? He that hath
clean hands and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully" (Ps. 24:3-4).
THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT: "Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God" (Matt. 5:8).
The principle of LUST OR COVETOUSNESS.
THE LAW OF MOSES: "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his
manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's" (Ex. 20:17).
THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT: ". . .That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery
with her already in his heart" (Matt. 5:28).
The principle of BROTHERLY LOVE.
THE LAW OF MOSES: "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbor,
and not suffer sin upon him. Thou shall not avenge , nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the Lord" (Lev. 19:17-18).
THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT: "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine
enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray
for them that despitefully use you, and persecute you" (Matt. 5:43-44).
Argument 13: Misconceptions About "The Sermon On The Mount"
Many believe that the teaching of Christ in "the sermon on the mount" is the revelation of New Testament doctrine
rather than a restatement the Old Testament law of Moses -- because of certain "words" that Jesus used. However,
these misconceptions are quickly corrected when we see how these "words" were not new -- but old and familiar
terms that Moses and the prophets had used for centuries in the Old Testament to describe God's teaching for Israel
in the old Mosaical age.
If we are to understand the Old Testament principles in "the sermon on the mount" we must not confuse those old
Mosaical teachings for "faith" and the "practice" of the old covenant religion by Christ in MMLJBC -- with his
revelation of new covenant teaching in Acts 2 through Revelation 22. The old law of Moses taught "one Lord, one
faith, one circumcision, and one moral righteousness in God"; the new covenant teaches "one Lord, one faith, one
baptism, and one moral righteousness in Christ." However, although there are similarities in the morality of both the
old and new covenants, there are major differences in the covenant "faith" and "practice" of religion that we must
understand. Therefore, we must "rightly divide" between those old and new covenant differences.
CHRIST'S TEACHING ON "ENEMIES" IN MATTHEW 5:43-44: It has been suggested by some that the teaching of
Jesus in "the sermon on the mount" with regard to how God's old covenant children should treat their old covenant
"enemies" within Israel was revolutionary, a totally new concept, never before heard by Israel or the world. However,
we point out that the teaching of Christ on the Jew's "enemies" in Israel in Matthew 5:43-44 was the same in
principle as the teaching of Moses on this issue in Leviticus 19.
Let us notice that the "enemy" of Matthew 5:43-44 was not an "enemy" Gentile or alien sinner, but a covenant Jew's
personal "enemy" among his covenant brethren in Israel. Because every Jew had both friends and "enemies" in
Israel, Jesus was emphasizing in "the sermon on the mount" how the law of Moses taught the Jews to treat their
"enemies" within Israel -- not how Christians should treat their "enemies" inside or outside of the church.
First, Moses taught that old covenant Jews would have personal "enemies" among other Jews within old covenant
Israel.
"If thou meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again (Ex. 23:4).
Also, God had Israel establish six cities of refuge to protect Jews, not from their Gentile "enemies," but from their
vengeful Jewish "enemies" within Israel (Numbers 35). Eli's own house became his "enemy" in Israel (1 Sam. 2:32),
and Saul became David's worst "enemy" (1 Sam. 18:29; 2 Sam. 4:8; 22:18; see also Ps. 7:1-7; 23:5). Jesus'
teaching in Matthew 5:43-44 concerning how old covenant Jewish brethren in Israel should treat their "enemies"
within their old covenant kingdom should not be looked upon as new and revolutionary teaching, for Moses and the
prophets had stressed the same old covenant teaching in Israel for centuries.
CHRIST'S USE OF THE WORD "WHOSOEVER" IN MATTHEW 5:31-32 AND 19:9:
Another misconception of Christ's teaching in MMLJBC is seen in the way that some interpret his use of the word
"whosoever." Many interpret Christ's use of "whosoever" to include "anyone" or "everyone" in the world, rather than
"whosoever in Israel" as the context demands. Please consider the following.
Some argue that the teaching of Christ on marriage, divorce and remarriage in Matthew 5 and 19, applies universally
to all men because Jesus uses the word "whosoever" in these two passages. They argue that "whosoever" means
"everyone," the alien sinners of the world as well as new covenant "Christians" in the New Testament church.
However, while the word "whosoever" does have a universal application in some New Testament passages where,
for example, the context describes the fact that "salvation" is possible for all men (Acts 2:21; 10:43; Rom. 10:13), it
is not so used by the Lord in the Old Testament passages of Matthew, chapters 5 or 19. In truth, there is no New
Testament passage which teaches that Christ or the apostles bind any new covenant law of Christ for the church
on both the alien and the Christian. Let us consider the three different ways the word "whosoever" is used in the
Scriptures.
1. "WHOSOEVER" IN ISRAEL (MATT. 19:9).
2. "WHOSOEVER" IN THE CHURCH (GAL. 5:10).
3. "WHOSOEVER" IN THE WORLD (ROM. 10:13).
(Because the book of Matthew is the only record of the life and teachings of Christ that contains the exceptive clause
"except it be for fornication" in Matthew 19:9, for this clause is not found in Mark, Luke or John, we shall specifically
study how Christ uses the word "whosoever" in book of Matthew.)
Because the word "whosoever" is used in the Scriptures in three different contexts, if we are to understand Matthew 5
and 19, we must determine the Old or New Testament context of the passage. First, in the Old Testament teaching
of the law of Moses in the book of Matthew it is used to describe "whosoever in Israel"; second, it is used in the New
Testament book of Galatians to describe "whosoever in the church"; third, it is used in the book of Romans to
describe "whosoever" or "everyone" in the world.
The old covenant context of "whosoever" in Matthew 5 and 19 clearly shows that Jesus was referring to "whosoever
in Israel" -- not "whosoever" in the alien world or New Testament church. Jesus was discussing Jewish law with the
Jews of Israel who were in an old covenant relationship with God, he was not discussing the alien Gentile's
accountability to the law of Moses. Jesus stated that his teaching of the law of Moses in MMLJBC, like
"the limited commission" that he gave to his Jewish disciples (Matt. 10:5-6), was for Old Testament Israel only.
Remember, Jesus made the following statement.
". . .I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt. 15:24).
Consider these examples of how Moses used "whosoever" to speak of "whosoever" in Israel," and not "whosoever" in
the alien world or New Testament church. Moses and the prophets, including Christ as the last prophet sent to Israel
in Matthew 19, used the word "whosoever" or "whoso" more than 100 times to describe "whosoever" in Israel," not
"whosoever in the world." In discussing the old covenant law of Moses for Israel, especially the law for marriage,
divorce, and remarriage, God's prophets to Israel never used the word "whosoever" to include everyone in the alien
Gentile nations during the Mosaical age or the alien sinners and "Christians" of the New Testament age.
"Whosoever he be of the children of Israel" (Lev. 20:2).
"Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord: whosoever doeth any work in
the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death" (Ex. 31:15).
"And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman. . .he shall bring his trespass offering unto the Lord, unto the door of the
tabernacle of the congregation. . ." (Lev. 19:20-21).
In the book of Matthew, Jesus as an Old Testament Mosaical "prophet" and teacher" of the law of Moses in Israel
(Jn. 9:17; Acts 3:22) always used the word "whosoever" to describe "whosoever" in old covenant Israel, he never
used the word "whosoever" with reference to everyone among the alien Gentile nations or the New Testament
church.
"Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the
least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the
kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the
scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 5:19-20).
Only Old Testament Israelites had received the old covenant commandments of the law of Moses from God (Ex.
19:5-6; Deut. 5:1-3); therefore, they were the only ones who could break the commandments of the law of Moses.
Alien Gentiles could not break the commands of the law of Moses, for a covenant law applies only to those with
whom the covenant is made and those under that covenant law. For the law of Moses spoke only to those who were
"under the law" (Rom. 3:19).
Because God made the Old Testament Mosaical covenant with only Israel, and because the Gentiles were excluded
from that old covenant law (Eph. 2:11- 12), only the Jews could obtain "righteousness" through keeping the law of
Moses in the old covenant between Jehovah and Israel. The "whosoever" of this passage refers to "whosoever in
Israel," not "whosoever" in the alien world or New Testament church.
"Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of
the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the
judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say,
Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire" (Matt. 5:21- 22).
Again, only Israel is in the context of Leviticus 19 and Matthew 5:21-22, therefore, the above passage speaks only to
"whosoever" was among the brethren of Israel and not to the alien world. When Jesus said, "Ye have heard that it
was said of them of old time," he was not referring to what was said by Moses and the prophets in covenant law, he
was referring to the false teaching of the rabbinical "traditions." And when Jesus said, "But I say unto you," he was
not revealing new New Testament law -- he was restating the true law of Moses in contrast to the Jew's false
rabbinical "traditions."
"But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in
his heart. And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy
members should perish, and not thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off,
and cast from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body should
be cast into hell" (Matt. 5:28- 29).
Many claim that the "whosoever" of Matthew 5:28-29 can only have universal application, because the law of Moses
condemned only the act and not the thought of sin. However, once again the "traditions" about the law of Moses
(held by some in the brotherhood today) are incorrect, for the law of Moses did both forbid and condemn sins of the
mind or heart.
In Exodus 20:17, God forbid Israel to "covet" or "lust" after its neighbor's wives and maidservants, for in the law to
"covet" or "lust" was a sin of the mind or heart for any Jewish child of God in the old covenant kingdom of Israel.
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his
maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's" (Ex. 20:17). Moses said that Israel should
not "lust" after or "covet" its neighbor's wives or maidservants, for to covet them would be a sin. The sin of
"covetousness" or "lust" occurs in the heart, and Israel was required to have pure hearts (Ps. 24:3-4).
"Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? or who shall stand in his holy place? He that hath clean hands, and a
pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully" (Ps. 24:3-4).
Only old covenant Jews in Old Testament Israel, not the alien Gentile world, was in the context of Exodus 20:17 and
Matthew 5:28-29.
"It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you,
That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and
whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery" (Matt. 5:31-32).
Once again, because the Gentile nations were not under the law of Moses at the time of MMLJBC, they could not
possibly be included in Jesus' use of the word "whosoever" in this passage. Only Old Testament Israel is in the
context of Deuteronomy 24 as those who had been commanded in the law of Moses to give a writing of divorcement.
Therefore, because only Israel was under the law of Moses that commanded a writing of divorcement, only the Jews
were included in Jesus’' teaching in Matthew 5:31-32. Here Jesus restated the truth of the old covenant law of
Moses to the Pharisees concerning marriage, divorce and remarriage in Israel.
CHRIST'S USE OF THE WORD "PERFECT" IN MATTHEW 5:48.
When Christ commanded the Jews to be "perfect" in Matthew 5:48, many have argued that this must describe New
Testament teaching -- for they have been led to believe that neither the law of Moses was "perfect" nor that any
Israelite could be "perfect" under old covenant law. Many have believed that the Mosaical covenant was inferior to
the new covenant of Christ, because the New Testament is spoken of as "the perfect law of liberty" (Jas. 1:25).
However, such concepts are totally unfounded in the Scriptures, for God also describes the law of Moses as a
"perfect" covenant law that did a "perfect" work in its old covenant age.
"The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul, the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple" (Ps.
19:7).
In fact, more than fifty times in the old Mosaical covenant does God use the word "perfect" to describe his work with
the law of Moses among people of Israel. God said that Israel would be a "perfect" nation among the heathens
(Deut. 18:13). Not only did he say the law was "perfect," but he describes Israelites who sought him with a "perfect"
heart. For example, Asa sought the Lord with a "perfect" heart (I Kgs. 15:14; 20:3); and Hezekiah also walked
before the Lord with a "perfect" heart (Isa. 38:3).
With such emphasis on being "perfect" under the law, we can understand why Jesus continued to encourage the
Israelites to be "perfect" under the law of Moses in Matthew 5. Luke said that Zacharias and Elizabeth were
"blameless" under the law of Moses (Lk. 1:5-60, and the apostle Paul also declared that he was "blameless" under
the law (Phil. 3:6).
Christ's use of the word "perfect" in Matthew 5 did not mean "sinless," as used by Moses and the prophets in other
Old Testament teaching, it does show his teaching of the law of Moses to the last generation of covenant Jews. It
certainly does not prove, as some claim today, that all of the teaching in MMLJBC is New Testament teaching.
Argument 14: Distinctive Old Testament Mosaical Laws And Concepts In "The Sermon On The Mount"
There are many distinctively Mosaical laws, concepts, and teaching concerning the Jews' Old Testament religion in
"the sermon on the mount" that are not part of New Testament doctrine. This sermon shows Jesus making a strong
contrast between the truth of Moses' law and the false rabbinical "traditions" that had arisen among the Jewish
rabbis -- not the revelation of New Testament doctrine. Jesus makes this plain when he contrasts what was said of
"them of old time" (the rabbinical traditions and perversions of the law), and the truth that Jesus was restating from
the law of Moses in MMLJBC.
The context of "the sermon on the mount" deals with the morality and faithfulness of the old covenant children of
Israel with Jehovah, and their relationship as brethren in Israel (Matt. 5:13-16). The Jews were the old covenant
children of God at that moment, the Gentiles (other nations) were separated from God and lost in their sins (Eph.
2:11-12). Therefore, "the sermon on the mount" was directed only to the children of Israel; it was not directed toward
the alien Gentiles of that day - - or the alien sinners or New Testament church of today.
At the time Jesus preached "the sermon on the mount, he addressed the teaching to only the old covenant children
of God in Israel who were -- at that time -- "the salt of the earth" and "the light of the world" -- to only old covenant
Jews who could call God "their Father which is in heaven" (Matt. 5:13-16).
"13Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good
for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. 14Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set
on an hill cannot be hid. 15Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it
giveth light unto all that are in the house. 16Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works,
and glorify your Father which is in heaven" (Matt. 5:13-16).
In Matthew 5:17-18, Jesus says specifically that he had not come "to destroy" but "to fulfill" the old Mosaical
covenant -- not reveal New Testament doctrine. Only the old covenant Jews had the written revelation, covenant
teaching, promises and knowledge of God (Matt. 5:19). At the time of Matthew 5, the Gentile nations had no
written revelation (Rom. 2:11-14; 3:1- 2), and therefore could not have had any part in the old covenant work of
Christ in MMLJBC.
"17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. 18For verily I
say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled"
(Matthew 5:17-18).
In Matthew, chapters 5 through 7, Jesus makes constant reference to the Jewish religion and the law of Moses, the
Pharisees, Jewish covenant brethren, and temple worship (Matt. 5:20-26). He speaks of Jerusalem the holy city of
Israel (Matt. 5:35), and that only the Israelites were the old covenant children of God (Matt. 5:47-48). He teaches on
Jewish almsgiving, synagogues and prayer (Matt. 6:1-7).
In "the sermon on the mount," Jesus taught the old covenant Jews how to pray for the "coming" of the new covenant
and "kingdom" of God, and to "seek" the coming of the New Testament church that he was to build in the (then) near
future (Matt. 6:8-17; 33; 16:13-18).
However, because New Testament Christians are now, in this New Testament age, already in the new covenant
kingdom of Christ -- they cannot scripturally pray for the coming of the New Testament "kingdom" today (Col. 1:13-
14; Heb. 12:28).
Jesus taught the Jews about fasting (Matt. 6:16-18). He taught that "the golden rule" of the Mosaical covenant (the
principle and law of brotherly kindness between Jewish children of God), was the teaching of "the law and the
prophets" (Matt. 7:12).
Finally, Jesus teaches that only those Jews in Israel who accepted him as the Messiah (even as Moses taught) and
believed his teaching concerning the end of the covenant and kingdom of fleshly Israel (Matt. 21:43; Rom. 10:1-
4) would be prepared for the coming of the New Testament "kingdom" and age (Matt. 7:21-29). No wonder the Jews
were "astonished" at his doctrine, for as the Messiah Jesus taught them with the old covenant authority of Moses –
not as the "tradition-bound" Jewish rabbis.
Churches of Christ have "rightly divided" the teaching of the Old and New Testaments from the beginning of the New
Testament age of the 1st century (Acts 2), and we must understand the Old Testament nature teaching of the law of
Moses by Christ in "the sermon on the mount" if we are to preach the "sound doctrine" of the New Testament in this
21st century (2 Tim. 1:7-13; 3:15-17; Titus 2:1-8).
My proposition that the "sermon on the mount" is exclusively Old Testament doctrine is affirmed by the teaching of
Christ and the Scriptures.
Dan Billingsly