Making the Lord’s Prayer central

Ulrich Luz has proposed a structure for the Sermon on the Mount that centers on the Lord’s Prayer.  In his analysis (Luz 2007, 165), he notes that the topical progression of Matt 4:23-25 appears again, in inverted form, in Matt 8:1-9:35. This, he suggests, forms a ring like structure that is continued into the Sermon itself and from which the Sermon takes its form (Luz 2007, 172-3). 

Although Luz would probably not agree, as he sees the Sermon as the product of the early church community, what he refers to as a ‘ring’ appears to be a beautiful example of the familiar Jewish device of chiasmus.  The structure of the Sermon, as suggested by Luz (Luz 2007, 173), may therefore be summarised as shown below.

• A1, Situation, Matt 5:1-2
• B1, Introduction, Matt 5:3-16 (Beatitudes and persecution) 
• C1, Law and prophets, Matt 5:17-20 (Fulfilling the Law)
• D1, The antitheses, Matt 5:21-48 (Surpassing the Law) 
• E1, Righteousness before God, Matt 6.1-6 (Almsgiving and prayer) 
• F1, Prayer words, Matt 6:7-8 (Not heaping up empty words)
• G, The Lord’s Prayer, Matt 6:9-13 
• F2, Prayer words, Matt 6:14-15 (The need for forgiveness)
• E2, Righteousness before God, Matt 6:16-18 (Hypocritical fasting) 
• D2, On possessions, judging and asking, Matt 6:19-7:11 (Trust in the Father) 
• C2, Law and prophets, Matt 7:12 (The Golden Rule) 
• B2, Conclusion, Matt 7.13-27 (Contrasting parables) 
• A2, Response of the audience, Matt 7:28-8:1

Luz further supports these parallels by observing (Luz 2007, 173):

• “kingdom of heaven” is repeated twice at Matt 5:3, 10 and twice in Matt 7:21 [sic, only once in 7:21, second reference is to father in heaven];
• Use of the third person in Matt 5:3-10 parallels use of the third person in Matt 7:21-27;
• Use of the second person in Matt 5:11-16 parallels use of the second person in Matt 7:13-20;
• In the Nestle-Aland text both D1 (the antitheses, as delimited by Luz) and D2 (on possessions, judging and asking) comprise 56 lines.

This proposed structure remains rather weak in levels B, D and F. However, it could be strengthened by noting the emphasis on choosing the way of righteousness within B1 (see commentary on the Beatitudes) and B2 (e.g. Matt 7:13-14). Moreover, F1 (not heaping up empty words) seems more sensibly a continuation of E1, the advice of which is then exemplified in the Lord’s Prayer, which includes F2’s petition for forgiveness. Thus the entire of level F seems redundant and somewhat contrived to achieve a convenient sevenfold nesting, which may be better achieved by recognising that the Lord’s Prayer (section G) is itself a tiny chiasmus that follows the general layout of the Sermon as suggested in the main outline (see notes on Matt 6:9-15).

Recognising this chiasmus and placing the Lord’s Prayer centrally makes considerable sense. Luz’ structure and the one adopted here would therefore seem to overlay one another quite neatly, providing a dual witness to the sense that the Sermon always has been a coherent unit.

Around the sermon, suggests Luz, the author provides a similar ‘ring’ like arrangement of topics (Luz 2007, 165).

• A1, Matt 4:23 - Jesus going about teaching and healing sickness
• B1, Matt 4:24 - bringing the sick who were suffering, the demon possessed, all being healed
• C1, Matt 4:25 - large crowds following
• D1, Matt 5:1 - reference to teaching
• E, Sermon on the Mount
• D2, Matt - reference to teaching
• C2, Matt 8:1 - large crowds following
• B2, Matt 8:16 - bringing the sick who were suffering, the demon possessed, all being healed 
• A2, Matt 9:35 - Jesus going about teaching and healing sickness

A1 to C1 (Matt 4:23-25) are perhaps best seen as an introductory summary of the events subsequently described in C2-A2 (Matt 8:1-9:35), included to facilitate the pattern and deliver certain theological points (see Chapter 27 of The Emmaus View), rather than as a narrative description of a period of ministry preceding the Sermon.

References

Luz, Ulrich. 2007. Matthew 1-7. Hermeneia: A Critical And Historical Commentary On The Bible. Edited by Helmut Koester. Translated by James E. Crouch. Minneapolis:Augsburg Fortress.