Matthew 5

v1

Getting into the brass tacks now, as we turn a corner into the sermon on the mount. It's interesting that Jesus sat down. I think he is mostly pictured as standing to teach in the sermon on the mount. I'm not sure just how mountainous a mountainside is, but when you look at the pictures Penny brought back from Israel, it's pretty hilly to say the least. It could be for the purpose of a natural ampitheatre sort of thing.

v2

Did he ever teach them. These could be some of the best known words of the best known lesson ever.

Interestingly, the non NIV translations have the words "he opened his mouth and taught them". I mean, that's probably more literal, but seemingly unnecessary to me. I don't think anyone is arguing he taught in sign language or interpretive dance.

v3

There is an interesting divide here between Matthew and Luke: Luke only says "poor", but Matthew adds "in spirit". The Lucan is pretty simple and clear, unless we are meant to read 'poor' with some sort of underlying metaphorical significance. But 'poor in spirit' is a much more nebulous term, especially when the blessing they receive is considered. It could be a jibe at the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, and be referring to those who look poor in spiritual actions. That seems a bit of a long bow to me. But the NASB has a note saying, "That is, those who are spiritually arrogant." So I guess it's a legit direction to take it.

Can it mean that those who are far from God will come to him and inherit the kingdom? Certainly that is the case. That is a pretty strong message to, say, gentiles too. I think it would be too much to say that there is a pattern of opposites in the beatitudes, but there are certainly multiple lines that simply report that these people will inherit the kingdom.

v4

Some people read these blessings as non-exclusive - so this one doesn't say that it is particularly blessed to be mourning if it means a heavenly comfort; more that this is just an expansion of the normal blessings that we know. This is in contradistinction to a more exclusive interpretation, that says that these are the real eternal blessings, and that other blessings (like being rich or happy in this life) are fleeting. This is backed up by other scripture (eg Luke 16:25). Hard to say. I guess I tend to fall on the latter simply because these are hard teachings, and I think they're meant to be that way - they're meant to turn the world upside-down.

v5

This is a great example of the flipping of the natural order. The meek are not usually the ones in power or the ones to receive the big benefit. That is a heavenly thing, not an earthly thing.

v6

Not all of these are doing that world-flipping though; some just seem to point out, like this one, that the right thing will be rewarded, will come out on top eventually. Doing the wrong thing does not pay long-term dividends.

v7

Of course, you could take exclusiveness too far. There are plenty of people who lacked mercy who will be shown mercy by God (which is I think what this is talking about, rather than just a sort of prid pro quo wisdom saying). But I guess even then they should show mercy once they've received the mercy.

v8

Are the pure in heart the only ones to see God? Certainly not if history has anything to say about it. But I guess if there is a non-exclusive element to this teaching, Jesus doesn't do much to imply it. Not here, at least.

v9

Doesn't really say by whom they will be called this. I assume the only person it really matters to be from though is God.

v10

And another claiming of the kingdom, this time for the persecuted. Again, there are a number of verses that make it pretty clear that the path of Christianity is a path of persecution. If someone is really living the Christian life, then persecution should really follow in some form. Sure, there are people who make deathbed choices and stuff; but this is a general rule rather than a slavish one, I think. They probably all are.