THE SERMON ON
THE MOUNT
A
Commentary by John Stott
|
Matthew 6:25-34 |
|
1.
Worry is incompatible with Christian faith (25-30) Our human experience is this: God created and now sustains our life; he also created and continues to sustain our body. This is a fact of every day experience. We neither made ourselves, nor keep ourselves alive. Now, our `life' (for which God is responsible) is obviously more important than the food and drink which nourish it. Similarly our `body' (for which God is also responsible) is more important that the clothing which covers and warms it. Well then, if God already takes care of the greater (our life and body), can we not trust him to take care of the lesser (our food and clothing)? The logic is inescapable, and Jesus enforces it in verse 27 with a question: "Which of you by being anxious can add one cubit to his span of life?" It is uncertain whether the last word of his question ("helikia") should be translated `span of life' (RSV) or `stature' (AV). It can mean either. To add half a metre to our stature would be a remarkable feat indeed, although God does it to all of us between our childhood and adult life. To add a period of time to our lifespan is also outside our competence. A human being cannot achieve this by himself. Indeed, far from lengthening his life, worry `may very well shorten it', as we all know. So just as we leave these matters to God (for they are certainly beyond us), would it not be sensible to trust him for the lesser things like food and clothes? Next, Jesus turns to
the sub-human world and argues the other way round. He uses birds as an
illustration of God's supply of food (26) and flowers to illustrate his
supply of clothing (28-30). In both cases he tells us to `look at' or
`consider' them, that is, to think about the facts of God's providential
care in their case. Some readers may know that I happen myself to have
been since my boyhood an enthusiastic bird-watcher. I know, of course,
that bird-watching is regarded by some as a rather eccentric pastime;
they view the likes of me with quizzical and patronizing amusement. But
I claim biblical - indeed dominical - warrant for this activity.
`Consider the fowls of the air,' said Jesus according to the AV, and
this in basic English could be translated `watch birds'! Indeed, I am
quite serious, for the Greek verb in his command ("emblepsate eis")
means `fix your eyes on, so as to take a good look at'. If we do take an
interest in birds and flowers (and we should surely, like our Master, be
gratefully aware of the natural world around us), then we will know that
although birds "neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, yet our
heavenly Father feeds them", and that although "the lilies of
the field (anemones, poppies, irises and gladioli have all been
suggested as alternatives to lilies, although the reference may be
general to all the beautiful spring flowers of Galilee) ... neither toil
nor spin", yet our heavenly Father "clothes" them, indeed
more gorgeously than "Solomon in all his glory". This being
so, can we not trust him to feed and clothe us who are of so much more
value than the birds and flowers? why, he even clothes the common grass
"which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven"!
`You see,' writes Martin Luther with great charm, `he is making
the birds our schoolmasters and teachers. it is a great and abiding
disgrace to us that in the Gospel a helpless sparrow should become a
theologian and a preacher to the wisest of men ... Whenever you listen
to a nightingale, therefore, you are listening to an excellent preacher
... It is as if he were saying "I prefer to be in the Lord's
kitchen. He has made heaven and earth, and he himself is the cook and
the host. Every day he feeds and nourishes innumerable little birds out
of his hand."' Similarly, this time quoting Spurgeon: `lovely
lilies, how ye rebuke our foolish nervousness!' |
