Thus, it is sensible to do all we can to see a different person get and have a good life no matter how great one’s life does not seem to be. The need to write on the topic of the sermon on the mount is to clarify various confusions cited by people each time on the relevance of the topic (Prabhavananda, 13). Using different theories of various philosophers is important to create substantial evidence as well as to leave any unanswered questions answered fully. Some critics have paid tribute to it since it is the best benevolent teachings in time immemorial, and considering the fact that the teachings can be taken literally. They give an example of St Francis of Assisi the man who risked his life to assist other individuals in society. He gave up everything and lived in abject poverty to see other humans live comfortably. Another example of one who gave up everything and whose actions can be compared to the teachings in the beatitudes is Padre Pio. He gave up everything and the only wealth he remained with was his priesthood veil, and a pair of sandals just to watch others have a better life.
This chapter involves proving the fact that the teachings from the sermon in the mount are substantial enough to prove the fact that justice overpowers injustice, and that the just live a more fulfilling life than the unjust. From this confusion and argument, substantial evidence is needed to give the people the most suitable answer. In Plato’s Reasoning theory, he supports the fact that justice is better compared to injustice. Plato defines justice as well as its characteristics. He further explains the point that when a city is just, its inhabitants will always live at peace with each other without much ado (Ashbaugh, 48). Plato uses this theory to challenge the sophists as to why one has to live morally in this life. Comparing this to the teaching on the sermon on the mount is clear that a just person is ruled by reasoning. .