Wednesday, January 5, 2011

The Beatitudes, Part 3 of 50

TEXT: Matthew 5:1-12

IDEA: The Sermon on the Mount doesn’t work well as a political platform.

PURPOSE: To help listeners realize that great ideals are not the ideal way to interpret the Sermon on the Mount.

“If only Jesus could be given a seat on the Security Council of the United Nations, we could have peace in the world.”
What do you make of a statement like that?

Have you ever wished that our political system could be better than it is?

I. There has been a great desire to apply the concepts of the Sermon on the Mount to government. “We should take back our country from the atheists or non-Christians and claim it for God.”

The Sermon on the Mount talks about the “kingdom of heaven.” There are those who believe that rather than applying it primarily to individuals, we ought to bring it to bear on governments. If the nations of the earth followed the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount, then the kingdom of heaven would be established on earth.

Leo Tolstoy, the great Russian novelist had a conversion experience and he became enamored with the teachings of Jesus and particularly the Sermon on the Mount.  He felt that governments should submit to the rule of Jesus. For example:

Jesus taught that we should not swear oaths and Tolstoy believed that governments should stop administering oaths to witnesses. (6:33-37).

Jesus said that we are not to resist evil or an evil person (6:38) so Tolstoy wanted to do away with armies and police forces. If we didn’t fight against evil, that would help usher in God’s kingdom.

Tolstoy himself attempted to live according to the concepts of the Sermon on the Mount.

II. He had no success getting the Russian government to go along with his ideas.

The Russian leaders actually thought he was evil and hounded and persecuted him.

At the turn of the 20th century this approach gained some popularity in the United States. It was called Progressive Idealism: “Every day and in every way the world will get better and better.”

Two world wars and other lesser wars have destroyed the Sermon on the Mount as a political statement.

Suppose Tolstoy or his followers had succeeded. Would that make much difference if a nation took the Sermon on the Mount as its constitution?

Do we need a Christian standard in place as a nation?

Every nation has better laws than the people follow.

III. Jesus wasn’t talking to the political leaders of His time or ours. He wasn’t urging them to adopt a new manifesto, the Sermon on the Mount.