Sie sind auf Seite 1von 3

Now when Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were astonished at his teaching, for

he taught them as one having authority, and not as their scribes (Matt. 7:2429). We have heard the Sermon on the Mount; perhaps we have understood it. But who has heard it correctly? Jesus answers this question last. Jesus does not permit his listeners to simply walk away, making whatever they like of his discourse, extracting what seems to them to be useful in their lives, testing how this teaching compares to reality.[238] [191]Jesus does not deliver his word up to his listeners, so that it is misused in their rummaging hands. Instead, he gives it to them in a way that it alone retains power over them.[239] From the human point of view there are countless possibilities of understanding and interpreting the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus knows only one possibility: simply go and obey. Do not interpret or apply, but do it and obey. That is the only way Jesus word is really heard. But again, doing something is not to be understood as an ideal possibility; instead, we are simply to begin acting.[240] This word, which I accept as valid for myself; this word, which arises from I have known you, which immediately draws me into acting, into obedience, is the rock on which I can build a house. This word of Jesus coming from eternity can only be answered by simply doing it. Jesus has spoken; the word is his; our part is to obey. The word of Jesus keeps its honor, its strength, and power among us only by our acting on it. Then a storm can sweep over the house, but it cannot tear apart the unity with Jesus created by his word. The only thing which exists besides action is inaction. There is no such thing as intending to act and not doing it. Those who treat the word of Jesus any other way except by acting on it assert that Jesus is wrong; they say no to the Sermon on the Mount; they do not do his word. All our questions, complications, and interpretations are inaction. The rich young man and the scribe in Luke 10 are examples.[241] I can insist on my faith and my fundamental recognition of this word as much as I want; Jesus calls it inaction. The word that I do not want to do is no rock for me on which I can build a house. [192]I have no unity with Jesus. He has never known me. Hence, when the storm comes, I will lose the word quickly and I will learn that in truth I never really had faith. I did not have the word of Christ. Instead, I had a word I wrested away from him and made my own by reflecting on it, but not doing it. Then my house falls down with a great fell, because it does not rest on the word of Christ. And the crowds were astonished [242] What had happened? The Son of God had spoken. He took the judgment of the world into his hands. And his disciples stood beside him. 1. The exegetical basis of this interpretation lies in the , which even the early church heavily emphasized in its exegesis.

Before Jesus speaks, there are moments of silence.[5] 2. There is no basis in scripture for constructing a contrast between Matthew and Luke. Matthew is not interested in spiritualizing the original Beatitude (Lukes form), nor is Luke interested in politicizing any original Beatitudes (Matthews form) referring only to state of mind.[7] Need is not the basis of blessedness in Luke, nor is renunciation the basis in Matthew. Rather, in both, need or renunciation, spiritual or political matters are justified only by the call and promise of Jesus, who alone makes the Beatitudes into what they are, and who alone is the basis of calling those matters blessed.

Question: What are the Beatitudes?