Spiritual Insights Page

INTRODUCTION

As a presupposition, this writer adopts the dispensational approach to Scripture. Dispensationalism maintains a distinction between Israel and the Church (1). Since unconditional covenants were made for Israel which have not been fulfilled and since these covenants are not primarily related to the distinct church, the dispensationalist teaches that the ultimate fulfillment of the major Biblical covenants will occur in a future kingdom dispensation. Temporal history marches towards the Kingdom Dispensation (2).

Most dispensationalists understand that the Gospel of Matthew deals at least with the presentation and rejection of the kingdom through the presentation and rejection of its King, our Lord Jesus Christ. The Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:1-7:29) is understood by most dispensationalists to be related to the Kingdom Dispensation; however, this writer has been able to identity four non-complementary interpretations of the sermon which are held by dispensationalists.

Kingdom Law

Some believe that the sermon records the law which will be enforced during the Kingdom Dispensation. Dr. Campbell describes this view:

The execution and fulfillment of this Code demands the personal presence of Jesus Christ as the ruler of the earth. That was not the case in the past nor is it in the present but it shall be in the future. These truths form a sort of constitution for the coming Messianic kingdom that will be established upon the return of Jesus (3).

However, Dr . Campbell notes certain exceptions to this interpretation of the sermon's purpose: ". . . an accurate exegesis of this discourse demands that some portions of it be regarded as outlining the requirements for entrance into the kingdom as other portions speak of the manner or life to be expected (4)." Dr. Rand broadens the exceptions by adding that, "As long as Christ was before Israel as her king, the kingdom teachings were in effect (5)."

Dr. Campbell also identifies two differing opinions within the group identifying the sermon as the law of the kingdom. One group, the minority and associated with ultra-dispensationalism, believes that applications from the sermon cannot be made to the present dispensation. The other group, the majority and associated with the main stream of dispensationalism, believes that applications may be made to the present dispensation when such applications are appropriate (6). This paper is concerned most with interpretation and not application. However, it should be stated that if the Sermon on the Mount reveals the ultimate, foundational righteousness of God, then such standards of righteousness may be our goal since God's righteousness is immutable throughout the dispensations.

In addition to Dr . Campbell, the following men are some of those who hold the interpretation that the Sermon records the law which will be observed during the Kingdom Dispensation: Lewis Sperry Chafer, Oliver B. Greene, Vernon C. Grounds, Leslie E. Lindower, G. Campbell Morgan, James F. Rand, Charles Caldwell Ryrie, Roland Russell Sasscer, Merrill F. Unger, and John F. Walvoord (7).

Interim Law

Whereas the emphasis of the Kingdom Law position is the primary application of the sermon to the citizens of the kingdom dispensation, the emphasis of the Interim Law position is primary application of the sermon to future citizens of the kingdom during the time of its offer. Dr. Johnson holds this position:

In other words, it is a kind of interim ethic, as Schweitzer suggested long ago. The immediate context supports this, for it presents our Lord as teaching in the Iight of an approaching kingdom (cf . 4: l7). He has also begun to gather disciples for it (cf. 4:18-22) . The teaching, then, is for them. They live in the period that precedes the kingdom. Having become spiritually prepared for it through repentance, they serve the King by a ministry designed to gather additional sons of the kingdom through the preaching of the good news. The Sermon regulates, then, the life and service of a regenerate and justified discipleship during the period preceding the inauguration of the kingdom (8).

There are also exceptions to this position as explained by Dr. Toussaint:

The Sermon is primarily addressed to disciples exhorting them to a righteous life in view of the coming kingdom . Those who were not genuine disciples were warned concerning the danger of their hypocrisy and unbelief. They are enjoined to enter the narrow gate and to walk the narrow way. This is included in the discourse, but it is only the secondary application of the Sermon (9).

The Interim Law position is not widely held. Besides Dr. Johnson and Dr. Toussaint, this writer has identified only Michael L. Finley (10).

Meritorious Salvation

Dr. Ryrie believes that criticism directed at Dr. Chafer and Dr. Scofield for believing in an Old Testament doctrine of salvation by works is without basis. He believes that these criticisms were made because of the critic's belief that the labeling of the current dispensation as the Dispensation of Grace eliminated grace in other dispensations, because critics often misrepresent dispensations as describing different ways of salvation, and because some dispensationalists have made unfortunate statements which, out of their context, seem to teach as the critics charge. In the contexts of the life teachings of Dr. Chafer and Dr. Scofield, Dr. Ryrie makes it clear that they never believed in meritorious salvation (11).

Practically speaking; however, there is a segment of dispensationalism which does believe in meritorious salvation in some dispensations. This writer has heard such doctrine from less scholarly dispensational preachers. Such preachers, though devoted dispensationalists, have probably become confused in the same three areas which Dr. Ryrie pointed out (see the previous paragraph). Often, when speaking of the Sermon on the Mount, they will point out how its Gospel is of works.

While doing the research for this paper, the writer came upon a thesis by Donald Sinclair. Wanting to he as generous as possible to this student of a dispensational seminary, we read and reread his thesis several times--but had to conclude that he taught meritorious salvation. It is possible that we would conclude otherwise it we had access to more of his doctrine. The thesis is saturated with such statements of which the following are but samples:

In the difficult question of the salvation of the Jews, a fundamental premise of the view that is taken here is this: that God, through the liberty given him by the provisional reconciliatory work of Christ, in sovereign grace, called out of an apostate World the man Abraham, and gave him and his seed a place of favor before Himself . He gave Abraham and his seed through Isaac a righteous standing somewhat analogous to that of Adam at the beginning. As long as there was no law, sin was not imputed to them. After the law was given, sin was imputed and all its consequences of spiritual death would follow. However, not as it was with Adam, if they disobeyed, restoration to the original position of blamelessness was possible through sacrifices (Lev. 6: 1-7; 16:30), or confession (2 Sam. 12 :13). If this original position received by the individual Jew at birth were maintained until death, he was in line for participation in all the gracious eternal benefits promised to the nation by covenant: that God should be their God by an everlasting covenant (Gen. 17:7), that Canaan should be their everlasting possession (Gen. 17:8), that the individuals should have a new heart, the law being written in their inward parts (Jer . 31:33; Ezek. 36:26; Deut . 30: 6), and that the nation and its Davidic monarchy should be forever (Jer. 31:36; 2 Sam. 7 :16) . . . deliverance from evil with the attainment of the eternal benefits that God of offered to them as a nation, was legal (12).

In evidence that the people obeyed the law with the intent of obtaining eternal life thereby, reference is made to the promise given by the Lord through Moses: "Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do he shall live in them" (Lev. 18: 5) . . . the Jews followed the law with the intent of meriting eternal life (13).

. . . there are only two types of teachings [in the Synoptic Gospels], legal , which demanded merit for salvation, and gracious, which offered salvation freely, without respect to the merit or demerit of the receiver (14).

The legal passages [in the Synoptic Gospels] show, first, that the righteousness which is a requirement for entrance into the kingdom of heaven is legal; secondIy, that the forgiveness which is necessary for salvation is on a legal basis; thirdly, that eternal life is a reward for good works; fourthly, that the future judgment of the Jews will be on a merit basis and will condemn many to perdition for their sins (15).

The portion of the last quotation which was underlined was done so by this writer to indicate the logical link between Mr. Sinclair's view of meitorious salvation in the Old Testament with his similar view of the Sermon on the Mount. One final quotation is recorded below which, had it been thoroughly integrated with the rest of his thesis and had been refined, could have made his thesis more acceptable to this reviewer:

That God did before the cross accept human merit, not as earning eternal life, for that must ever be by the blood of Christ, but as a condition of the rewarding of the Jews with eternal life in their resurrection (on this point note that the scribe asked concerning "inheriting eternal life," and not possessing it as the Christian does immediately upon belief; John 3:36; 5:25; I John 5:13) has already been evidenced in this thesis . . . (16)

It would seem that Mr. Sinclair believes that a Gospel is taught in the Sermon on the Mount (this statement will be further documented when we begin to deal with the sermon's text and again quote Mr. Sinclair) similar to that which was taught during the Dispensation of Law--forgiveness was made possible by the retroactive feature of the death of Christ but conditioned upon the continuing merit of the candidate for eternal life as exhibited by his keeping of the Mosaic Law. While we may criticize other features of his thesis (e.g., lack of eternal security for Old Testament saints, confusion of the nation of Israel's adherence to the Law for blessing and the individual's trusting in promises for eternal life, etc.), this paper will address the question of a Gospel being proclaimed in the Sermon on the Mount and, if it is being proclaimed, the content or that Gospel.

In any case, the Meritorious Salvation understanding of the Sermon on the Mount is nonexistent in careful dispensational theology.

Entrance Requirements

The emphasis of this position is not that the sermon is a law imposed upon a people who are waiting to enter the kingdom or who are living in the kingdom; rather, the emphasis of the Entrance Requirements position is upon the standard of righteousness a person must exhibit if he is to enter the kingdom at its conception. It is explained by Dr. Pentecost:

When they came together one question was paramount in their minds: "How can we enter Your Kingdom? How righteous must we be to be saved? Will our righteousness be sufficient to admit us to Your Kingdom?". . . They were concerned about the righteousness demanded for entrance into His Kingdom (17).

Unlike the Meritorious Salvation position, the Entrance Requirements position does not understand that the sermon states a precise statement of how that righteousness is to be obtained other than indicating that the "way" is through our Lord. Again this position is not widely held by dispensationalists. Besides Dr. Pentecost it is held by Gary Card (18).

Purpose of Paper

The purpose of this paper will be to evaluate these four interpretations in light of the context of the sermon and its content: Does the sermon record the law which will be enforced during the Kingdom Dispensation? Does the sermon record the law by which future kingdom citizens should live while they are waiting to enter the kingdom? Does the sermon indicate that citizens of the kingdom must have meritoriously received their salvation before they can enter? Does the sermon record the standard of righteousness which must be obtained by a person before he may enter the kingdom? These are the questions which this paper will attempt to answer. It should be noted; however, that these questions simplify the issues since the interpretations are not necessarily mutually exclusive and few hold them rigidly without overlapping. They are listed and are being addressed in this paper in order to deal with the critical points of interpretation.

April 26, 2006, Edition -- © 1999-2002, 2006 Ken Bowles