Scripture Study

Matthew 5:17-20

Background

“Do not think that I have come to destroy the law or the prophets. I have not come to destroy them but to fulfill them. This is the truth I tell you – until the

heavens and the earth shall pass away, the smallest letter or the smallest part of any letter shall not pass away from the law, until all things in it shall be

performed. So then, whoever will break one of the least of these commandments, and will teach others to do so, shall be called least in the

kingdom of the heaven; but whoever will do them and will teach others to do them, he will be called great in the kingdom of the heavens. For I tell you, that

you will certainly not enter into the kingdom of heaven, unless your goes righteousness beyond that of the scribes and Pharisees.”

STOTT Jesus has spoken of a Christian’s character, and of the influence the Christian will have in the world if he exhibits this character and if his character bears fruit in “good works.” He now proceeds to further define this character and these good works in terms of righteousness. He explains that the righteousness He has already mentioned twice – that for which His disciples hunger (verse 6) and for which they will suffer (verse 10) – is a conformity to God’s moral law which surpasses the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees. The “good works” are works of obedience. He begins His Sermon with Beatitudes in the third person (“Blessed are the poor in spirit,” “Blessed are they . . . “); He continues in the second person (“You are the salt of the earth.”); and now He changes to the authoritative first person and uses for the first time His distinctive and dogmatic formula “I say to you . . .” (verse 18) or “I tell you . . .” (verse 20).

This paragraph is of great importance not only for its definition of Christian righteousness but also for the light it throws on the relation between the NT and the OT, between the gospel and the law. It divides itself into two parts: first, Christ and the law (17, 18); and secondly, the Christian and the law (19, 20).

LLOYD-JONES These verses, although they are a continuation of what has gone before, mark the beginning of a new section in the Sermon. Before this we have been reminded of what we are; then we have been told that we must remember it and let our life be such that it will always be a manifestation of this essential being of ours. We are children of God and citizens of the kingdom of heaven. Because of that, we must manifest the characteristics of such people. We do this in order to manifest God’s glory, and so that others may be brought to glorify Him.

The question then arises as to how this is to be done. The answer can be put like this: we are to live a life of righteousness. That one word sums up Christian living: “righteousness.” The theme of the remainder of the Sermon on the Mount (until you come to 7:14) is just that -- the kind of life of righteousness which the Christian is to live.

What is the characteristic of this righteousness which we must manifest? This passage in the fifth chapter is a general introduction to that subject. Jesus introduces this whole question of the righteousness and the righteous life which are to characterize the Christian. Observe His method. Before He comes to the details, He lays down certain general principles. He has an introduction before He really begins to explain and expound His subject. It is always vital to start with principles.

He does so by laying down in this paragraph two categorical propositions. In the first, in verses 17 and 18, He says that everything He is going to teach is in absolute harmony with the entire teaching of the OT Scriptures. There is nothing in this teaching which in any way contradicts them. The second proposition which He lays down in verses 19 and 20, is that this teaching of His which is in such harmony with the OT is in complete disharmony with and an utter contradiction of the teaching of the Pharisees and scribes.

Those are two great pronouncements and they are important, because we shall never understand the record of Christ’s life – which we have in the four Gospels – unless we grasp these two principles. Here we have an explanation of all the antagonism towards Him which was displayed by the Pharisees and the other Jewish legalists. Here is the explanation of all the troubles that He had to endure, and the misunderstanding to which He was constantly subjected.

Another observation is that Jesus was not content with making positive statements only; He also made negative ones. He was not content with just stating His doctrine; He also criticized other doctrines. Many people seem to object to negative teaching, but Jesus criticized the teaching of the Pharisees and scribes. He exposed it and denounced it frequently.

Why did He introduce the Sermon on the Mount in this way? As we read the Gospels, we see that there was much confusion with regard to Jesus and His teaching; He was a problem to His contemporaries. He was not a Pharisee, and He had not been trained as a Pharisee. He had not been to the customary schools, so they looked at Him and asked: “Who is this man who teaches and makes these dogmatic pronouncements?” He did not come to His position as a teacher along the usual channels, and that created a problem. He deliberately criticized the Pharisees and the scribes and their teaching – the acknowledged leaders and religious leaders. Here was a Man who did not belong to their schools; who not only taught, but also denounced their authoritative teaching. He did not spend time expounding the law, but He preached an extraordinary doctrine of grace and of the love of God. Even worse, He mixed with publicans and sinners. Not only did He not seem to observe all the rules and regulations, He actually seemed to be deliberately breaking them. In His words He criticized their official teaching, and in practice He did the same.

Questions began to arise about whether He believed the Holy Writings, and whether He had come to do away with the law and denounce the prophets. Jesus knew that these questions would arise because of His personal character and what He taught. So here, at the very introduction of His detailed teaching, He met the criticism. In particular, He warned His disciples in case they should be confused and influenced by the talk and criticism. He prepared their minds and outlook by laying down these two fundamental postulates.

He had already told them in general what they were to be like and the kind of righteousness they were to manifest. Now, He wanted them to understand the whole setting. This is a very urgent and practical subject for each one of us who is concerned about the Christian life. This is not merely an old problem; it is a modern one. It is not something theoretical, but for some people Christ’s relationship to the law is a stumbling block in their Christian life.

Two main difficulties are raised in regard to this. One group believes that all Jesus did was to continue teaching the law. According to these people, the Gospels are nothing but an exposition of the ancient law, and Jesus of Nazareth was a Teacher of the Law. The Gospels are nothing but law, ethical teaching and moral instruction; there is nothing in them about the doctrine of justification by faith sanctification and such things. The other difficulty is the exact opposite of that. The second view is that Christ abolished the law completely, and that He introduced grace in place of it. They argue that the Bible says we are under grace; so, they believe we must have nothing to do with the law.

Jesus answers both of these in the vital statement in verses 17 and 18 which deals with the specific matter of His relationship to the law and to the prophets. The best way to understand what He said is to define the terms to be certain that we understand their meaning.

The “law,” as it is used in this passage, means the entire law. This, as given to the children of Israel, consisted of three parts: the moral; the judicial; and the ceremonial. God gave it in the books of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. The moral law consisted of the Ten Commandments and the moral principles that were laid down once and forever. The judicial law means the legislative law given for the nation of Israel in its special circumstances at that time, which indicated how men were to order their behavior in relationship to others and the various things they were and were not to do. The ceremonial law concerned burnt offerings and sacrifices and all the ritual and ceremony in connection with their worship in the temple and elsewhere. The “law” included all that. Therefore we can conclude that Jesus is here referring to everything that it teaches directly about life, conduct and behavior.

The law includes everything that is taught by the various types – the different offerings and all the details that are given about them in the OT. [Types are events, persons, or statements in the OT seen as pre-figuring or superseded by antitypes -- events or aspects of Christ or His revelation described in the NT.] Some Christians see no reason to study or even read the Pentateuch (the first five books of the OT). For instance, the importance of details about the meal and the salt and various other things are questioned. These are just types, and they are all prophecy in their way of what was done perfectly by Jesus Christ. When we

talk of the law, we must remember all that is included – not only the positive, direct teaching of these books and their injunctions on how life should be lived; but also all they suggest and foretell with regard to what was to come. The law must be taken in its entirety in verses 17-20. In the rest of the Sermon from verse 21 onwards when Jesus speaks of the law, He is speaking only of the moral section.

The next term to examine is “the prophets.” The term means all that we have in the prophetic books of the OT. The prophets actually taught the law, and they applied and interpreted it. Their main endeavor was to call the people back to a true understanding of God’s law by reading and expounding on it. In addition, they did foretell the coming of the Messiah.

The final term is “fulfill.” There has been much confusion with regard to its meaning. It does not mean to complete, to finish. It does not mean to add to something that has already been begun. It has been said that the OT began a certain teaching, and that it carried on so far and up to a point. Jesus came and carried it a stage further, rounding it off and fulfilling it. The real meaning of the word “fulfill” is to carry out – to fulfill in the sense of giving full obedience to it, literally carrying out everything that has been said and stated in the law and in the prophets.

Let us now consider what Jesus is really saying. We will look at the verses 17 and 18 in reverse order. The first pronouncement is that God’s law is absolute; it can never be changed – not even modified to the slightest extent. It is absolute and eternal. Its demands are permanent, and can never be revoked or reduced “till heaven and earth pass” – until the end of the age. Heaven and earth are signs of permanence. While they are there, nothing shall pass away, not even a jot or a tittle – the smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet and the smallest point in the smallest letter. This is a momentous announcement, emphasized by the word “for” – which always calls attention to something and denotes seriousness and importance. Then He adds to the importance by saying: “Verily, I say unto you.” He is impressing the statement with all the authority He possesses. The law that God laid down, which you can read in the OT and all that has been said by the prophets, is going to be fulfilled down to the minutest detail; and it will hold and stand until this absolute fulfillment has been entirely carried out.

In light of that, Jesus makes his second statement to the effect that obviously, therefore, He has not come to destroy – or even to modify – the teaching of the law or the prophets. He has come to fulfill and to carry them out, and to adhere to them and give them perfect obedience. That is the central claim made by Christ. It is that all the law and all the prophets point to Him and will be fulfilled in Him down to the smallest detail. Everything that is in the law and the prophets culminates in Christ, and He is the fulfillment of them.

Jesus, in these two verses confirms and puts His seal of authority on the entire OT – the law and the prophets. To Christ the OT was the Word of God; it was Scripture; it was something absolutely unique and apart; it had authority which nothing else has ever possessed nor can possess. This is His vital statement with regard to the subject of the authority of the OT.

Many people think that they can believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and yet reject the OT – which raises a question of our attitude toward Jesus. If we say we do not believe the accounts in the OT (creation, Abraham, the law given to Moses, etc.), we are contradicting everything Jesus said about Himself, the law, and the prophets. Everything in the OT, according to Him is the Word of God – which is going to stand until it is fulfilled. It is God’s law; it is God’s enactment.

The words of the prophets were not the words of poets who saw a little further into life -- and made wonderful statements about life and how to live it. These were men of God who were given their message by Him. They spoke the truth -- and all will be fulfilled. It was all given with reference to Christ. He is the fulfillment of all these things, which will end only when they are fully carried out by Him.

The early church understood the vital significance of the OT. The OT and the NT cast light upon each other, and in a sense can only be understood in the light of the other. These two Testaments must always go together. St Augustine put it this way: “The New Testament is latent [hidden, concealed] in the Old Testament; the Old Testament is patent [evident, manifest] in the New Testament.”

Jesus said that He had not come to supersede the OT, the law and the prophets. He had come to carry it out and fulfill it. He regarded it all as the Word of God, and we should as well. When you begin to question the authority of the OT, you are of necessity questioning the authority of the Son of God Himself. Watch His

quotations from the OT Scriptures – the quotations from the law and the prophets and from Psalms. He quotes them everywhere. It is God’s own Word which “cannot be broken,” and which is going to be fulfilled in the minutest detail and which lasts as long as heaven and earth are in existence.

B-MT(1) In this statement, Jesus lays down the eternal character of the law; yet Paul says in Romans 10:4: “Christ is the end of the law.” Jesus repeatedly broke what the Jews called the law. He did not observe the hand washings that the law laid down; He healed sick people on the Sabbath, although the law forbade such healings, etc. He was condemned and crucified for being a law-breaker, but here He speaks of the law with a reverence no Pharisee could exceed. The smallest letter – the letter which the AV calls the jot – was the Hebrew letter iodh. It was like an apostrophe; not even a letter not much bigger than a dot was to pass away. The smallest part of the letter – what the AV calls the tittle – is what we call the serif, the little projecting part at the foot of a letter, the little line at each side of the foot of the letter “I”, for example. Jesus tells His followers that the law is so sacred that not the smallest detail of it will pass away.

The Jews used the expression “the law” in four different ways:

1. They used it to mean the Ten Commandments.2. They used it to mean the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch –

which literally means “The Five Rolls.” That was to the Jews the law par excellence and was to them the most important part of the Bible.

3. They used the phrase “the law and the prophets” as a comprehensive description of the entire Scripture – what we call the OT.

4. They used it to mean the “oral” or the “scribed law.”

In the time of Jesus, it was the scribal law which was most common and which both Jesus and Paul so utterly condemned. In the OT we find very few rules and regulations. What we do find are great, broad principles which people must interpret for themselves under God’s guidance, and then apply to the individual situations in life. In the Ten Commandments, there are no rules and regulations at all; they are each one of them great principles out of which people must find their own rules for life. That did not seem enough to the later Jews. They believed that the law was divine, and that in it God had said His last word – and that everything must be in it. If something were not in the law “explicitly,” it must

be there “implicitly.” They, therefore, argued that out of the law it must be possible to deduce a rule and a regulation for every possible life situation. There arose a group of men called the scribes whose job it was to reduce the great principles of the law to thousands of rules and regulations.

To explain this more completely, let us consider the law which says the Sabbath day is to be kept holy, and that on the Sabbath no work could be done. That is a great principle, but the Jewish legalists asked: “What is work?”

All kinds of things were classified as work. For instance, “to carry a burden” is to work – but then “burden” had to be defined. The scribal law decided that a burden is “food equal in weight to a dried fig, enough wine for mixing in a goblet, milk enough for one swallow, honey enough to put upon a wound, oil enough to anoint a small member, water enough to moisten an eye-salve, paper enough to write a custom-house notice upon, ink enough to write two letters of the alphabet, reed enough to make a pen,” etc. Then they spent hours arguing whether a lamp could or could not be lifted from one place to another on the Sabbath; whether a tailor committed a sin if he went out with a needle in his robe; whether a woman might wear a brooch or false hair – even if it were permissible to go out on the Sabbath with false teeth or an artificial limb; or if a parent might lift a child on the Sabbath day. These things to them were the essence of religion. Their religion was a legalism of petty rules and regulations.

“To write” was to work on the Sabbath – but writing must be defined. This is the definition: “He who writes two letters of the alphabet with his right or with his left hand, whether of one kind or of two kinds, if they are written with different inks or in different languages, is guilty. Even if he should write two letters from forgetfulness, he is guilty, whether he has written them with ink or with paint, red chalk, vitriol, or anything which makes a permanent mark. Also he that writes on two walls that form an angle, or on two tablets of his account book so that they can be read together is guilty . . . But, if anyone writes with dark fluid, with fruit juice, or in the dust of the road, or in sand, or in anything which does not make a permanent mark, he is not guilty . . . If he writes one letter on the ground, and one on the wall of the house, or on two pages of a book, so that they cannot be read together, he is not guilty.” That is a typical passage from the scribal law, which orthodox Jews regarded as true religion and the true service of God.

“To heal” was to work on the Sabbath. Healing was allowed when there was danger to life – especially in troubles of the ear, nose and throat. Even then steps could be taken only to keep the patient from becoming worse; no steps might be taken to make the patient get better. A plain bandage might be put on a wound, but no ointment; plain wadding might be put into a sore ear, but not medicated wadding.

The “scribes” were the men who worked out these rules and regulations. The “Pharisees,” whose name means “the separated ones,” were the men who had separated themselves from all the ordinary activities of life to keep all these rules and regulations.

For many generations, this “scribal” law was never written down; it was the “oral” law – and it was handed down in the memory of generations of scribes. In the middle of the 3rd century A.D. a summary of it was made and codified. That summary is known as the Mishnah; it contains sixty-three treatises on various subjects of the law, and in English makes a book of almost 800 pages. Later Jewish scholarship busied itself with making commentaries to explain the Mishnah. These commentaries are known as the Talmuds. There are twelve printed volumes of the Jerusalem Talmud; there are sixty printed volumes of the Babylonian Talmud.

To strict orthodox Jews in the time of Jesus, religion -- serving God – was a matter of keeping thousands of legalistic rules and regulations. They regarded these petty rules and regulations as literally a matter of life and death and eternal destiny. Jesus did not mean that not one of these shall pass away. He repeatedly broke them Himself, and he repeatedly condemned them. That is definitely not what Jesus meant by the law, for that is the kind of law that both Jesus and Paul condemned.

Jesus said that He had come not to destroy the law, but to fulfill the law. He came to bring out the real meaning of the law. Behind the scribal and oral law, there was one great principle which the scribes and the Pharisees had imperfectly understood. The one great principle was that in all things people must see God's will; and, when they know it, they must dedicate their whole lives to the obeying of it. The scribes and Pharisees were right in seeking God’s will, and they were

right in dedicating their lives to obeying it. They were wrong in finding that will in their man-made rules and regulations.

What is the real principle behind the whole law -- that principle which Jesus came to fulfill and the true meaning of which He came to show?

When we look at the Ten Commandments, which are the essence and the foundation of all law, we see that the whole meaning can be summed up in two words – “respect” and “reverence.” Reverence for God and for the name of God, reverence for God’s day, respect for parents, respect for life, respect for property, respect for personality, respect for oneself so that wrong desires may never overpower us. These are the fundamental principles behind the Ten Commandments – principles of reverence for God, and respect for our neighbors and for ourselves. Without them there can be no such thing as law; all law is based on them.

Jesus came to fulfill that reverence and that respect. He came to show people in actual life what reverence for God and respect for one another are like. The Greeks said that Justice consists in giving to God and to others that which is their due. Jesus came to actually show what it means to give to God the reverence and to other people the respect which are their due.

FEB The OT law, the “Torah” or instruction, was the rule of life given by God (in the first five books of the Bible) to help His people know how to live. It included the Ten Commandments, the heart of the moral law. It also included social and religious laws, down to detailed matters of hygiene and daily behavior.

The principles of the law are basic to our understanding of the way man and society have been designed to work. As the “Maker’s Manual,” the law shows us how God wants us to live. The religious and ceremonial laws no longer apply in detail – for instance, the sacrifices have been fulfilled in the death of Jesus, but the principles hold firm.

God first brought His people out from slavery in Egypt; then He gave them the law. It was not the other way around; they were not expected to obey the law in order to be delivered. However, after the return from exile in Babylon many Jews began to see the law as a means of gaining salvation. If a person kept the law, God would accept him.

Jesus Himself never rejected the law; but, He said quite clearly that its day was past, for its place had now been taken by His own teaching which fulfilled its deepest meaning. The NT completely rejects the false idea that by obeying any law a person can earn salvation. This comes only by the free gift of God’s grace. The law makes clear what sin is; but this only emphasizes human need, because we are unable to keep the whole law of God. Therefore, a true understanding of the law leads a person to Christ to accept His free forgiveness.

After their escape from slavery in Egypt, God led the Israelites through the desert to Mt. Sinai. They camped at the foot of the mountain, while God gave Moses the laws His people were to obey. The covenant God had previously made with individuals – Abraham, Isaac, Jacob – He now renewed with the whole nation. They were His people; He was their God. He had rescued them and He expected them to respond by obeying His laws. They were not just rules for worship or religious occasions. They covered every aspect of life – and they were summed up in the Ten Commandments.

This is the best known collection of Israel’s laws. It clearly has a special significance -- in the book of Exodus it is the first set of laws given on Mt. Sinai, and in Deuteronomy it is said at the end of the commandments: “These words the Lord spoke to all your assembly . . . and He added no more” (Deuteronomy 5:22). These words meant that there were no other laws of equal importance.

The Ten Commandments are addressed to the whole nation of Israel – not just to a particular group like the priests -- and to every Israelite as an individual. They are unique as a collection, but each one of them is found again in other places in the Hebrew laws.

The Ten Commandments were written on two stone tablets. This probably means two copies. The reason for having two copies of the Ten Commandments has only recently been understood. When a written covenant was made in the Bible world, each party involved in the covenant had a copy of its contents. If the covenant were between two nations, the two copies would be kept far apart – in the temple of a god of each land. In Israel, though, the covenant was between God and His people. Both copies of the Ten Commandments were kept in the Covenant Box (Ark of the Covenant). This was the center of Israel and it was also the place of God’s presence. So God’s copy and Israel’s copy could be kept

together. The Ten Commandments, then, were the terms of the covenant that God had made with His people. At Sinai, the people of Israel accepted these terms.

The penalty for breaking any of the Ten Commandments is not mentioned. But if these commandments are compared with similar ones, it seems that the penalty was death (compare Exodus 20:13 with Exodus 21:12). The penalty was not always carried out.

In any society many more detailed rules and laws are necessary; the basic laws need to be expanded. If the commandment says that you are not to do any work on the Sabbath, who is meant by “you” and what counts as “work”? In Exodus 20:10 the simple command must be spelled out in detail. It must be made clear that “you” is not just the father of the Israelite family, but also “your children, your slaves, your animals . . . the foreigners who live in your country” (Deuteronomy 5:14). Later, the Jewish rabbis spent much time on exactly defining “work.” Jesus was criticized by some because He and His disciples healed and picked grain on the Sabbath (Luke 14:3-4; Matthew 12:1-2). This was against the Pharisees” definition of “work.”

The Ten Commandments are God’s “covenant-law” for Israel. In addition to these, Israel’s law books (Exodus to Deuteronomy) contain many “case-laws”, some of them similar to those of other countries. There are three major collections of Laws.

The first follows on from the Ten Commandments in Exodus 21-23. It is sometimes called the “Book of the Covenant.” It contains moral, civil and religious laws. Instructions about worship are followed by laws dealing with the rights of slaves; manslaughter and injury to human life; social and religious duties; justice and human rights. At the end come instruction for the three great religious festivals. The laws show God’s concern that life as a whole should be just and fair.

Leviticus 17-26 contains a second collection of laws -- the “holiness laws.” These mainly concern how the Israelites should worship God, the rituals connected with the tabernacle. They also deal with everyday behavior. The keynote of the teaching is the command, “Be holy, because I, the Lord your God, am holy” (Leviticus 19:2). Israel is to be holy because the nation belongs to God.

The third collection of detailed laws is set down in Deuteronomy 12-25. They cover many of the same matters dealt with in Exodus and Leviticus; but they come in the form of a sermon given by Moses to the Israelites before they went into the Promised Land. They include frequent encouragements to keep the Law, and warnings of what will happen if the people disobey.

The Law was intended to be a guide to good relationships – with God and with other people. The Hebrew word which is usually translated “law” is torah, which actually means “guidance” or “instruction” These laws were never intended to be a long list of dos and don’ts to make life a burden. The Law reflects God’s character – His holiness, justice, and goodness. It expresses His will. It gives His people the practical guidance they need in order to obey His command to “Be holy, as I am holy.”

The time between the Testaments was marked by a new determination to obey the Law in all its details. Scribes not only copied the Law with great care, but they explained the laws to the people. This was a time when the Law was studied and extended, as never before.

Some would ask if Christians today are bound by it as the Law of God. On the one hand we have the sayings of Jesus, who said He has “not come to abolish the Law;” He has come to “fulfill” it – to fill it with fuller meaning. Until heaven and earth pass away, He says, not the least portion will pass from the Law. Whoever disobeys the least important of the commandments shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven. On the other hand, Paul states that Christ “has brought the Law to an end.” He sees the OT Law as something that was “introduced” at a certain point in history and was intended to be valid only until the time of the coming of Christ. Some have thought the difficulty between the two views can be solved by distinguishing between the moral laws (which are still in force) and the ritual, ceremonial, and social laws of the OT (which applied only to the Israelites). Yet, it is impossible to say which laws are which. Also, although Paul acknowledges that the Law is from God and is “holy, just, and good,” he speaks of even the moral law as “cancelled” by the work of Jesus Christ (Colossians 2:14). Christians are “free” from the Law and are not subject to it – and in these passages Paul is thinking of the law as a whole, not just the moral law.

For Christians, then, Jesus has taken the place of the Law. He has not put the Law aside or rejected it, but has summed it up. When Paul says that he is under Christ’s law, he does not mean that he has accepted a new set of laws. He is a follower of Jesus and is filled with His spirit. By being linked with Jesus, sharing His new life, and the power of His Holy Spirit, Christians are able to follow His example and obey His law. Christ’s law is not a law that enslaves people because they are unable to keep it. It is the “perfect law that sets people free” (James 1:25).

EBW The Greek word for “law” is nomos. Its roots in Greek culture assume a social process by which members of a community develop patterns of expectations, which become traditions, and finally are incorporated as norms that define a person’s duties to others and the state. By the fifth century B.C., laws were written laws, which if not obeyed brought punishment.

The philosophers were disturbed by the uncertainty and change they saw in laws generated by society. They looked for a source of law outside history – a source of law that would be in harmony with the nature of the universe itself. Their conviction was that life could be meaningful only if it were lived in harmony with universal principles.

At times this sense of “universal principle” best captures the meaning of nomos in the NT. Paul described his inner struggle with sin in these terms. He found within himself a “law” – nomos, principle – of sin and death.” He wanted to respond to the revealed law of God, but his own fallen nature betrayed him. So Paul turned to another universal principle operating in God’s universe: “the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:2). He had to rely on the principle of divine enablement to lift him beyond his own powerless state.

Usually, however, the meaning of nomos in the NT is shaped by OT thought and the various meanings of torah. In the NT too, law is a word of instruction from God, coming from outside, that authoritatively marks out the path of righteousness and blessing.

In Jesus’ time the rabbis, the teachers of the law, focused their faith on law. God had given the torah, the first five OT books, to Moses. All else (the Writings and the Prophets) were but commentary on this core. The religious leaders in Jesus’ day were certain not only that these Mosaic books were the key to life and death

but also that the individual could keep the law and please God. The young ruler’s question, “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” (Luke 18:18) sums up the understanding of religion held by most of the religious people in his generation.

When Jesus appeared, He did not deny the Law (the books of Moses). But He did directly challenge the understanding of the OT on which contemporary Jewish faith was based.

BMC In a theocracy (direct rule of God), God promotes holiness of life among the people as a whole and provides for their eternal salvation. God met these two objectives through the giving of the law with its directives for living, the provision of festivals and feasts as means of corporate worship, the building of a tabernacle as a place where God especially dwelt among them and where the people could meet Him, and the institution of the priesthood that could represent the people to God and offer prescribed and acceptable sacrifices on their behalf to atone for their sins. Though most of the law had immediate relevance for their lives in the wilderness, some of it made sense only after they were in the Promised Land.

Soon after the Hebrews arrived at Mt. Sinai, God proceeded to give them the Law, commonly called the Mosaic Law. This He did audibly to Moses, accompanied by repeated trumpet blasts, flashes of lightning, thunder and the smoking of the mountain. God Himself was enveloped in a thick cloud or a ball of fire on the top of the mountain. This was to demonstrate that the words Moses passed on to the Hebrews were indeed the words of God.

First god gave them the Ten Commandments. Then He communicated the ordinances, which especially had to do with social life. After that there were directives for Israel’s worship, especially the building of the tabernacle and the clothing of the priests. This was a long process; Moses stayed on the mountain for forty days and forty nights. The people committed themselves to obey the covenant.

As God began to impart the law, He first gave Moses the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:1-17), which Moses repeats with only slight variations in Deuteronomy 5:7-21. All of them are repeated in principle under grace teachings in the NT – except the fourth, which commands observance of the Sabbath. After the resurrection of Jesus Christ on Sunday, Christians gave special significance to the first day of the week. They assembled themselves for worship on that day and

frequently “broke bread” (took communion), but there never was any divine instruction as to how the day was to be spent.

God did not give the Mosaic Law to the “called out” people as a way to gain spiritual life, but as a means by which they would become a “peculiar treasure” and a “kingdom of priests” (Exodus 19:5-6). That is, the Law served as a divinely instituted rule of life governing God’s covenant people.

The laws of any society do not necessarily describe how that people lived. They only indicate how a dominant group in that society want it to behave. In this case the Mosaic laws describe how God wanted the Hebrews to conduct themselves. The laws tell about the real nature of society only as we can discover the degree to which the Hebrews obeyed them.

UNT The English term “Law” is not a precise equivalent of the Hebrew word Torah, “law” – which is obvious to those who read the Pentateuch carefully. The Pentateuch contains legend, history, and myth, as well as specific rules or regulations. To the Jews, Torah was a very inclusive term that referred to all that God had revealed about Himself, their history, and the conduct that was required of them. In time, the entire written revelation came to be referred to as Torah; though in the more narrow sense Torah always meant the Pentateuch and often specifically God’s commandments.

In the eyes of the Pharisees, Jesus’ concern for sinners brought Him into constant relationship with those who defiled Him ritually. Jesus did not want to overthrow the whole ritual law; rather, He was combating those who would substitute ritual purity for inward purity of heart. When men refused to associate with sinners because they feared ritual defilement, Jesus believed that ritual purity had supplanted purity from within.

Clearly, Jesus differed from the Pharisees in His understanding of the Torah. But there were also certain underlying agreements. Both agreed that the Torah was the revelation of God’s will; both agreed that it must be interpreted; both sought to discover in it the righteousness of God; both began with the demand of the Torah: “You, therefore, must be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:48; Leviticus 19:18). Even with these points of agreement, differences remain. The principal difference seems to have been in the understanding of “perfection.” The Pharisees thought of perfection largely in

terms of the literal fulfillment of laws; Jesus thought of perfection in terms of God’s mercy and goodness, which could not be attained by fulfilling literal rules but was an inward condition of the heart that only God could give.

Since Jesus believed that the Torah had been given to guide men to a love of God and their fellow men, He radically disagreed with those who had made it a barrier between men and between God and men. Not that the Pharisees were not righteous in terms of keeping the literal requirements of the Law, but the Pharisees’ righteousness had become an excuse for passing judgment on other men and for separating themselves from them – and thereby God.

ICB All these words about the law are set in an eschatological setting. They speak of the law’s enduring until the end of the age and of the reward that will come in the new age for those who faithfully obey the commandments. The claim attributed here to Jesus that he has come -- meaning God has sent Him – “to fulfill . . . the law and the prophets” means far more than that Jesus is acting out a role laid down for Him in the words and prediction of the prophets of Israel. It is rather the declaration that both the purpose of God disclosed through the prophets and the demands of God that His people obey Him have found their fulfillment in Jesus. There is to be no relaxation of the strictness of the commandments. For Matthew, at least certain aspects of the ceremonial law are as binding as the moral sections (Matthew 5:23; 6:17).

ABC If verses 18 and 19 are a genuine saying of Jesus, He asserts that every minute requirement of the Law is valid and will be fulfilled – and that any violation of any one of the most insignificant of these requirements involves the infringement of the whole Law. Such teaching does not represent the mind of Jesus as it is revealed for us in the Gospels as a whole. Some of the sources used by the compiler of the Gospel were evidently influenced by the controversy between Paul and the Jewish-Christian section of the church in Jerusalem. According to Burnett H Streeter, an early 20th century British biblical scholar, in the heat of the controversy certain sayings of Jesus were interpreted by one or other of the contending parties – especially the Judaistic. This section of the church at Jerusalem was apparently influential on Matthew’s record.

NIVSB Jesus is not speaking against observing all the requirements of the Law but against hypocritical Pharisaical legalism. Such legalism was not the keeping of

all details of the Law, but the hollow sham of keeping laws externally to gain merit before God while breaking them inwardly. It was following the letter of the Law while ignoring its spirit. Jesus repudiates the Pharisees’ interpretation of the Law and their view of righteousness by works. He preaches a righteousness that comes only through faith in Him and His work. In the rest of the chapter, He gives six examples of Pharisaical externalism.

CHB This section is especially appropriate in Matthew’s Jewish Gospel. Luke’s sermon, being for Gentile readers, has nothing similar, and in his whole Gospel there is only one parallel (Luke 16:17). In one aspect Christ’s attitude to the Law was conservative. He regarded Christianity as continuous with, and in a true sense identical with, the religion of the Law and the Prophets. He could even repeat the current teaching of the rabbis that the Law was eternal and that not a jot or tittle could be taken from it. He severely rebuked such of His disciples as should presume to despise or undervalue the smallest part of the OT. They should not indeed be excluded from His kingdom, but they should be the least in it.

On the other hand, He made it clear that this eternal validity did not belong to the Law as Moses left it, but to the Law as “fulfilled” – developed or completed by Himself. He superseded the Law and the Prophets by fulfilling them, and He fulfilled them in all their parts. The spiritual and moral teaching of the Law and of the Prophets He freed from all lower elements and carried forward to their ideal perfection. The political teaching of the Law He completed by laying down the principles of the perfect state. Even the ceremonial law He fulfilled. The Law of Sacrifice was fulfilled in His sacrificial death, and in the spiritual sacrifices of prayer and praise and thanksgiving in which His death is acknowledged. Circumcision became “the circumcision made without hands – Holy Baptism. The Passover became the Lord’s Supper. The sanctification which the Law gave to one day in seven was extended by Christ to every day in the week – and even the Sabbath itself was perpetuated and continued by Him as the Christian “Lord’s Day.” Even such minor matters as ceremonial ablutions and the distinction of meats received their due fulfillment when Christ made possible the inward holiness which these outward observances symbolized.

Above all, the prophets were fulfilled by Christ in a most comprehensive way. He was not content simply to carry out their idea of the Messiah. He improved upon it, or “fulfilled it.” No careful student of the OT can fail to see how infinitely the actual NT fulfillment exceeded expectation of even the most enlightened OT prophets. This, and not the mere literal fulfillment of their predictions, is what Jesus meant by “fulfilling the prophets.”

ASB The Pharisees were an influential political and religious sect during the Second Temple period (530 B.C. and 70 A.D – or 530 BCE and 70 CE). During this time of increasing foreign influence, they promoted the faithful observance of Jewish law at both a national and an individual level. The exact meaning of the term “Pharisee” is uncertain. The noun derives from the Hebrew verb meaning “to separate” or “to distinguish.” The title appears to have been applied originally in a negative sense when the Pharisees were expelled from membership in the Sanhedrin under John Hyrcanus (135-104 B.C.), though it was later understood in a positive sense – either as “those who separated themselves” from all sources of ritual uncleanness or “those who interpreted the law precisely.”

The Pharisees believed that God was the sovereign Creator, who expressed His will to humanity through Scripture. He granted humanity the gifts of responsible moral choice and reason in order to apply the Scriptures to this life in preparation for the resurrection, judgment and the life to come. Members of this sect carefully observed the Mosaic Law, systematically interpreting and adapting it to the condition of their own time in order to maintain a sense of purity among the populace. This system of interpretation and way of life was transmitted by generations of teachers and became known variously as the oral law, the tradition of the elders, the works of the law, or the Halakhah (from a Hebrew word meaning “walk”). Halakhah is traditional Jewish teaching that governs behavior and religious practice.

The Pharisees saw themselves as the heirs of a vast body of interpretative tradition that enabled them to function as reliable guides for the Jewish people during a tumultuous era. Although some Pharisees came to believe in Jesus as the Christ, the majority justified their opposition to Him on the grounds that Jesus ostensibly taught on His own authority, as well as on the basis of His interpretations of various issues that were of vital concern to them.

Jesus criticized the Pharisees on the grounds that, for all of their commendable observance of rules and traditions, they were fundamentally unrepentant, neither knowing God nor loving people.

LAB If Jesus did not come to abolish the law, does that mean all the OT laws still apply to us today? In the OT there were three categories of law – ceremonial, civil, and moral.

1. The ceremonial law related specifically to Israel’s worship (for example, Leviticus 1: 2-3). Its primary purpose was to point forward to Jesus Christ. These laws, therefore, were no longer necessary after Jesus’ death and resurrection. While we are no longer bound by ceremonial laws, the principles behind them – to worship and love God – still apply. Jesus was often accused by the Pharisees of violating ceremonial law.

2. The civil law applied to daily living in Israel (see Deuteronomy 24:10-11). Because modern society and culture are so radically different from that time and setting, all of these guidelines cannot be followed specifically; but, the principles behind the commands are timeless and should guide our conduct. Jesus demonstrated these principles by example.

3. The moral law (such as the Ten Commandments) is the direct command of God, and it requires strict obedience (see Exodus 20:13). The moral law reveals the nature and will of God, and it still applies today. Jesus obeyed the moral law completely.

HSB Here is an uncompromising affirmation of the eternal validity of the Law of Moses. Not the smallest part of it is to be changed. Some readers have difficulty with this uncompromising confirmation in recognizing the speaker as Christ who, according to Paul, “is the end of the law, so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes” (Romans 10:4).

Others find no difficulty in supposing that Paul’s conception of Jesus differed radically from the presentation of His character and teaching in the Gospels. The view has indeed been expressed that Paul is pointed to as the man who “breaks one of the least of these commandments” and teaches others to do the same. This implies that the saying does not come from Jesus, but from a group in the early church that did not like Paul. Even where the reference to Paul would not be entertained, it is held by many that these words come from a group in the

early church that wished to maintain the full authority of the law for Christians. According to Rudolf Bultmann, a German theologian, the saying “records the attitude of the conservative Palestinian community in contrast to that of the Hellenists.”

There were probably several selections of sayings of Jesus in circulation before the Gospels began to be produced, and one of these – which was preferred by stricter Jewish Christians – seems to have been used by Matthew. Such a selection of sayings could be drawn up in accordance with the outlook of those who compiled it; sayings which in themselves appeared to support that outlook would be included, while others which appeared to go contrary to it would be omitted. The teaching of Jesus was much more diversified than any partisan selection of His sayings would indicate. By not confining himself to any one selection Matthew gives an all-around picture of the teaching.

A saying such as this had three successive life-settings: its life-setting in the historical ministry of Jesus; it setting in a restricted selection of Jesus’ sayings; and its setting in the Gospel of Matthew. (Subsequently, in addition to these three settings, it may have acquired life-settings in the history of the church and in the course of interpretation.) It is only its setting in the Gospel of Matthew that is immediately accessible to us. Actually, part of it occurs in a different context in Luke 16:16-17, in which Jesus says, “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John [the Baptist]. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.” The second of these two sentences is parallel to (but not identical with) Matthew 5:18.

The selection of sayings which is believed to have been drawn up in a more legally-minded Christian circle – and which Matthew is widely considered to have used as one of his sources – is often labeled M (because it is represented in Matthew’s Gospel only). Another, more comprehensive selection on which both Matthew and Luke are widely considered to have drawn is commonly labeled Q. It may be that the form of the “jot and tittle” saying found in Matthew 5:18 is the M form, while that found in Luke 16:17 is the Q form. There are two thoughts on this subject. The first was that Luke’s form of the saying is closer to the original

wording and that the form in Matthew “is a revision of it to bring it explicitly into line with Rabbinical doctrine.” The other possibility was that the saying in its original form asserts not the perpetuity of the Law but the unbending conservatism of the scribes – that it is not intended to be “sound Rabbinical dogma but bitter irony.” Jesus may have been saying in addressing the scribes: “The world will come to an end before you give up the tiniest part of your traditional interpretation of the law.”

It is plain that Jesus did not accept the rabbinical interpretation of the law. He charged the scribes – the acknowledged students and teachers of the law – with “breaking the command of God for the sake of your tradition” (Matthew 15:3, based on Mark 7:9). He said that by their application of the law “they tie up heavy loads and put them on men’s shoulders” (Matthew 23:4). By contrast, He issued the invitation: “Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for . . . my yoke is easy, and my burden is light” (Matthew 11:29-30).

The law for Jesus was the expression of God’s will. The will of God is eternal and unchangeable. Jesus did not come to modify the will of God; He fulfilled it. The standard of obedience to that will which He set, by His example and His teaching, is more exacting than the standard set by the written law. He insisted that the will of God should be done from the heart; but, in so insisting, He provided the means by which the doing of God’s will from the heart should not be and unattainable ideal. Paul maintained that men and women are justified before God through faith in Jesus and not through keeping the law. He also maintained that those who have faith in Jesus receive His Spirit so that “the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit” (Romans 8:4). The gospel demands more than the law, but supplies the power to do it. The following poem has been attributed to John Bunyan, F. F. Bruce, and others:

“To run and work the law commands, Yet gives me neither feet nor hands; But better news the gospel brings; It bids me fly, and gives me wings.