|

POSTED 12 JANUARY, 2010
Matthew
5:17-19:
Has the Law Been Fulfilled?
by
J.K. McKee
editor@tnnonline.net
|
MATTHEW 5:17-19 ―
ENGLISH |
|
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the
prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For
verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one
jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law,
till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break
one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so,
he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven:
but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same
shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven (KJV).
Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the
prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil
them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth
pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the
law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one
of the least of these commandments and teaches men so,
shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he
who does them and teaches them shall be called great in
the kingdom of heaven (RSV).
Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the
Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For
truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away,
not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the
Law until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one
of the least of these commandments, and teaches others
to do the same, shall be called least in the
kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them,
he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven (NASU).
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the
Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill
them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth
disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke
of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until
everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the
least of these commandments and teaches others to do the
same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but
whoever practices and teaches these commands will be
called great in the kingdom of heaven (NIV).
Don't think that I have come to abolish the Torah
or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish but to
complete. Yes indeed! I tell you that until heaven and
earth pass away, not so much as a yud or a stroke
will pass from the Torah- not until everything
that must happen has happened. So whoever disobeys the
least of these mitzvot and teaches others to do
so will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven.
But whoever obeys them and so teaches will be called
great in the Kingdom of Heaven (CJB).
|
|
MATTHEW 5:17-19 ―
GREEK[1] |
|
Mē nomisēte hoti ēlthon katalusai ton nomon ē tous
prophētas ouk ēlthon katalusai alla plērōsai. Amēn gar
legō humin heōs an parelthē ho ouranos kai hē gē, iōta
hen ē mia keraia ou mē parelthē apo tou nomou, heōs an
panta genētai. Hos ean oun lusē mian tōn entolōn toutōn
tōn elachistōn kai didaxē houtōs tous anthrōpous,
elachistos klēthēsetai en tē basileia tōn ouranōn hos d’
an poiēsē kai didaxē, houtos megas klēthēsetai en tē
basileia tōn ouranōn.

|
Matthew 5:17-19, which preface the Sermon on the Mount which
follows, are some of the most important verses
of the Apostolic Scriptures (New Testament) for
today’s Messianic movement. These verses speak
of the Messiah’s intent to fulfill, and not
abolish, the Mosaic Law. But what does it mean
that the Messiah was to come and fulfill the
Law? Does it just pertain, as is commonly
thought, to the prophetic agenda of
accomplishment that is realized by the Messiah’s
arrival? Or, is there a multi-layered dynamic of
the Messiah’s coming to “fulfill” the Torah,
which must be taken into consideration? Has the
Law been “fulfilled and thus abolished,” as many
people today conclude? If this is in error, then
what might need to be corrected in some
Believers’ view of the Torah?
Immediately prior to stating that His intention is to fulfill the
Law, Yeshua has told His audience that they are
the light of the world, responsible for
spreading light to all in the world (Matthew
5:14-15). The Lord says, “Let
your light shine before men in such a way that
they may see your good works, and glorify your
Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 5:16), and He
proceeds to speak on how His ministry has come
to fulfill the Torah. The Sermon on the Mount
itself is deeply rooted within the instruction
of the Torah and Tanach, the Old Testament; it
either expands and deepens principles originally
given by Moses and the Prophets, or clarifies
some First Century misunderstandings of their
teachings. Nowhere do we see in Matthew chs. 5-7
any kind of explicit denial of the relevance and
supernatural inspiration of the Tanach
Scriptures. On the contrary, now that the
Messiah has arrived, their importance for
guiding men and women of faith into greater
holiness is only intensified.
Various evangelical Christians today, who read Yeshua’s Sermon on
the Mount, admittedly struggle when they
encounter Matthew 5:17-19. The Messiah’s
explicit claim in coming to fulfill, and not
abolish His Father’s Instruction in the Torah,
is something that they wrestle with. Much of
today’s contemporary Christian theology has
asserted that at best, the Law of Moses was
something for a previous era, and it is not
something that has continued validity in the
post-resurrection age. Is this a conclusion that
aligns with the Messiah’s own words on the
matter? Thankfully, there are Christians today
who do believe that the Mosaic Law has various
decrees of validity for New Covenant Believers,
and will recognize that the contemporary
Church’s widescale dismissal of the Torah has
not at all aided it. Some kind of return and
re-appreciation of the Torah needs to be
enacted.
Yet even while many Christians will agree in principle that the
smallest stroke of the Torah is to not lose
importance—how are we to uphold its authority?
Does it mean that Believers are to follow more
than just the Ten Commandments, and other
ethical and moral statutes? Does it mean that
commandments typically classified as being
“ceremonial” should be considered relevant too?
What does it mean that those who teach from the
Torah will be considered “great” in the Kingdom
of God?
These three short verses have been responsible for convicting many
of today’s Believers that they need to
reconsider prior positions held about the Law of
Moses. The Holy Spirit has used Matthew
5:17-19 to convict many evangelical Christians
to return to a foundational understanding of the
Torah, leading them into the Messianic movement
and setting them on a course of wider Torah
obedience. Many Messianic Jews, especially if
they were raised in a liberal Reform Judaism,
have also been stimulated by the thrust of
Matthew 5:17-19, to take the Torah and their
Jewish heritage a bit more seriously (especially
in lieu of their possible testimony to fellow
Jewish family members, and the false belief that
believing in Jesus means that one’s Jewishness
gets jettisoned).
Like many of today’s Messianics, I believe that the Torah remains
relevant instruction for God’s people today. I
believe that part of being salt and light to the
world (Matthew 5:13-16) means being Torah
obedient as the Messiah was Torah obedient—foremost
in how we love others. Yet, our Messianic
faith community probably throws Matthew 5:17-19
around a little too much, without really probing
what it directs Messiah followers to understand.
I think it is appropriate that we take a closer
look at Yeshua’s teaching on the validity of the
Torah, not only recognizing how He emphasizes
its ongoing importance, but that we engage with
the array of opinions present in current
Matthean scholarship. Is it possible that we
have overlooked, overemphasized, or
underemphasized any of the various dimensions in
how our Savior “fulfills” the Torah?
Fulfillment of the Torah and the Prophets—Not
Abolishment
Do not think that I came to abolish the Law
or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish
but to fulfill.
Yeshua the Messiah (Jesus Christ) is quite clear to assert that
within His ministry and teachings, “Don't
misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to
abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the
prophets” (NLT). Why does the Messiah have to
assert, before delivering His Sermon on the
Mount, that He did not come to abolish or render
inoperative the Torah and the Prophets? Was He
really such a radical figure for His generation?
Do recall how earlier in Mark’s Gospel it is
said of Him, “What is this? A new teaching with
authority!” (Mark 1:27). Yeshua the Messiah
possessed unique supernatural power, and given a
controversy that ensued regarding proper
activities on the Sabbath (Mark
2:23-3:6), some might have inappropriately
thought that He was trying to overthrow Moses’
Teaching and lead others astray. Various
religious leaders, encountering this person from
Nazareth, might have tried to discredit Him as
He was a threat to their authority. Yeshua
makes His audience know that any thoughts about
Him overthrowing the validity of the Torah are
confounded.
Yeshua’s teaching that follows in the Sermon on the Mount might
correct some misunderstandings of Moses and the
Prophets held by many of the common people and
religious leaders, but it will not stand in
conflict to Moses and the Prophets themselves.
John Nolland has added an appropriate
explanatory sentence, in brackets, to his
rendering of Matthew 5:17: “Do not make the
judgment [when you find me critical of what you
have heard it was said to the people of old]
that I came to annul...”[2]
Throwing away the Torah or Prophets is the last
thing Yeshua came to do. W.D. Davies and D.C.
Allison further explain how,
“5.17-20 is primarily prokatalepsis, that is, an
anticipation of objections. As the introduction
or preamble to 5.21-48...it is intended to
prevent the readers of the First Gospel from
making two errors. First, it plainly states that
the six subsequent paragraphs are not to be
interpreted—as they have been so often by
many—as ‘antitheses’, ‘antitheses’ that, in at
least two or three instances, set aside the
Torah. Instead Jesus upholds the law, so that
between him and Moses there can be no real
conflict.”[3]
But what does it mean to “abolish” the Torah,
and what does it mean to “fulfill” the Torah?
This is the main thrust of Yeshua’s opening
word to His Sermon on the Mount. Much of our
thinking about whether He came to uphold Moses’
Teaching as a standard still to be followed
today, will be affected by how we interpret the
statements that follow. It should be quite
obvious that “abolish” and “fulfill” are used in
v. 17 to contrast each other and they are not
synonyms, but what specific meaning(s) do they
convey?
From a classical vantage point, the verb kataluō (kataluw), rendered “abolish,” has a variety of possible meanings we can
take into consideration. They include: “to
put down, destroy,”
“of governments, to dissolve, break up, put
down,” and “to end, bring to an end”
(LS).[4]
The more theologically-informed definitions seen
in BDAG are quite poignant, as
kataluō
can mean “to cause the ruin of someth.,
destroy, demolish, dismantle” and “to
end the effect or validity of someth.”[5]
These are precisely the actions that Yeshua the
Messiah came not to do.
The other three instances where
kataluō appears in Matthew pertain to demolishing the
Temple (24:2; 26:61; 27:40). The verb kataluō
is also employed in ancient Jewish literature to
describe some kind of overthrowing or
termination of either Torah commandments or
related customs.[6]
Abolishing or overthrowing the Torah might also
be viewed in relation to misinterpreting the
Torah, as seen in the Rabbinic dictum, “One who
desecrates holy things...misinterprets the
Torah—even if that person were to possess [great
knowledge of] Torah and [were a great doer of]
good deeds” (m.Avot 3:11).[7]
Misinterpreting or misapplying the Torah could
be something that Yeshua’s critics could accuse
Him of doing in His teaching that will follow,
as what He said did run contrary to some of the
norms of the day.
The last thing that Yeshua has come to do is “abolish” or “destroy”
(KJV) the Torah; instead He states that He has
come to “fulfill.” But what does “fulfill”
really mean? Suffice it to say, there is no
small debate over what the verb plēroō (plhrow),
which appears in our source text, relates to.
From a lexical standpoint, we have an array of
definitions available: “to
bring to completion that which was already
begun,
complete, finish”
(BDAG),[8]
“to bring to a designed end, fulfill”
(BDAG),[9]
or “to
make complete in every particular; to render
perfect”
(Thayer).[10]
BDAG properly indicates, regarding
Matthew 5:17, “depending
on how one prefers to interpret the context,
plhrow
is understood here either as fulfill=do,
carry out, or as bring to full expression=show
it forth in its true mng., or as fill up=complete.”[11]
Yeshua’s fulfillment of the Torah stands in contrast to any thought
that it should be cast aside as irrelevant. The
lexical definitions of
plēroō
that are available do give us some important
options as to how it can be applied. But, these
definitions by themselves do not at all answer
all the questions or criticisms that may arise.
From a textual standpoint, Matthew’s Gospel employs the verb
plēroō, but this is probably not what the
Messiah Himself orally spoke in His Sermon on
the Mount. While attempts have been made to
associate plēroō as being Matthew’s Greek
equivalent of the Aramaic verb qum (~Wq), “to stand up, rise; to stand, exist” (Jastrow),[12]
D.A. Carson is correct to conclude, “The LXX
[Septuagint] never uses plēroō
(‘fulfill’) to render qûm or
cognates...The verb plēroō renders
mālē’ [alm]
and means ‘to fulfill.’”[13]
Speculating on what was actually spoken by
Yeshua in either Hebrew or Aramaic may not be as
significant as some might think, as what is said
in the wider cotext of Matthew 5:17-19 is
actually more determinative than the meanings of
the actual vocabulary. Hagner offers a good
summary paragraph of how we need to approach
this:
“The precise meaning of
plhrwsai, ‘to fulfill,’ is a difficult question that has produced much
debate. The verb means literally ‘to fill to the
full’ (from Aramaic
alm, mĕlāʾ,
‘fulfill,’ rather than
~Wq,
qûm, ‘establish,’ which is never
translated by
plhroun
in the LXX). From this basic meaning comes such
derivative meanings as ‘accomplish,’ ‘complete,’
‘bring to its end,’ ‘finish.’ ‘Fulfill’ here
hardly means ‘to do,’ although Jesus in his
conduct is faithful to the true meaning of the
Torah. ‘Complete’ is congruent with the stress
on fulfillment in and through Jesus but wrongly
connotes that Jesus has come simply to add
something to the law. The meaning in this
instance cannot be determined by word study
alone but must be established from the context
and in particular must be consonant with the
statement of v 18”[14]
(emphasis mine).
While lexical definitions of the Greek verb plēroō can be
helpful in interpreting Matthew 5:17, it is
insufficient for us to consider what plēroō
means alone. Nolland makes the point, “‘Fulfill’
must be taken in a manner that allows it to be
an appropriate counterpart to ‘annul.’”[15]
As such, we have to consider what the ministry
and mission of the Messiah actually involve.
Surely, in fulfilling the Torah and the
Prophets, Yeshua somehow demonstrates something
quite positive about them. But does His
fulfilling of the Torah and Prophets actually
regard any kind of proper interpretation, or for
that matter any kind of obedience? Controversy
among interpreters undoubtedly ensues when these
questions are asked. Carson protests, “Others
understand the verb plēroō to mean that
Jesus ‘fills up’ the law by providing its full,
intended meaning...This, however, requires an
extraordinary meaning for plēroō...”[16]
Yet there are many who would notably disagree
with this assessment by Carson.
A popular view of Yeshua’s fulfilling the Torah, frequently heard
in today’s Messianic community, is that
“fulfill” and “abolish” were ancient Rabbinic
terms used to describe the proper and improper
application of the Torah’s commandments.[17]
Yeshua’s proper application of the Torah and
Prophets surely does follow in the Sermon on the
Mount. However, the thrust of v. 17 is mainly
Yeshua’s upholding the authority of the Torah’s
commandments by His fulfillment. This is because
He anticipates that there would be people either
in His generation, or in subsequent generations,
who would probably claim that He really did come
to overthrow the Law. Messianic commentator Tim
Hegg confirms, “He did not come to render the
Torah and the Prophets as useless for His
talmidim [disciples], but to make the words of
the inspired texts all the more applicable and
real in their lives.”[18]
By no means is Yeshua’s fulfillment of the Torah
tantamount to some kind of total reversal of
Deuteronomy 27:26.[19]
First and foremost, though, is Yeshua’s concern
with the ongoing validity of the Torah, which is
to be maintained as a result of His fulfilling
it. Hagner describes,
“The ethical teaching of Jesus that follows in
this sermon...has such a radical character and
goes so much against what was the commonly
accepted understanding of the commands of the
Torah that it is necessary at the outset to
indicate Jesus’ full and unswerving loyalty to
the law.”[20]
When we weigh the available meanings of plēroō, and really
consider the mission of Yeshua’s life and
ministry, we actually see a very profound
picture take shape. It is too little to say that
in fulfilling the Torah, Yeshua kept its
instructions perfectly to be our blameless
sacrifice for sins. It is equally too little to
say that in fulfilling the Torah, Yeshua came to
interpret it properly for the people of His day
and those who would follow after. And it goes
too far to say that in “completing” the Torah,
the Messiah has now rendered it irrelevant as
spiritual instruction in the post-resurrection
era. Leon Morris aptly summarizes the three main
views of how Yeshua has fulfilled the Torah,
which need to be considered:
1.
It may mean that he would do the things laid down in Scripture.
2.
It may mean that he would bring out the full meaning of Scripture.
3.
It may mean that in his life and teaching he would bring Scripture
to its completion.[21]
Morris goes on to state, “Each points to an aspect of the truth,
and Jesus may well have meant that he would
fulfil Scripture in more ways than one.”[22]
And he is right: each view has to be weighed
into our understanding of “fulfillment.”
Among today’s interpreters of Matthew 5:17-19, Yeshua’s claim to
fulfill the Law is primarily divided into two
sub-categories: (1) those who believe that
Yeshua fulfills the Law by His unique Messianic
teachings on and interpretations of the Torah
and accomplishing its predicative
prophecies; versus (2) those who believe that
Yeshua only fulfills the Law by accomplishing
its Messianic prophecies. Considering the
importance of Matthew 5:17-19 to the validity of
the Torah for Believers today, the chart below
has been compiled to give you a good idea about
where various theologians and commentators
stand:
|
Matthew 5:17-19
HOW DOES THE MESSIAH “FULFILL” THE LAW? |
|
CONCERNS YESHUA’S TEACHINGS ON THE TORAH, and HIS
PROPHETIC ACCOMPLISHMENTS
|
LARGELY CONCERNS
ESCHATOLOGICAL PROPHECIES |
|
“[T]he Old Testament does indeed instruct us about God and man
and salvation, etc. All of the great biblical
doctrines are there. Yet it was only a partial
revelation. Jesus ‘fulfilled’ it all in the sense of
bringing it to completion by his person, his teaching
and his work....Second, the Old Testament contains
predictive prophecy. Much of it looks forward to the
days of the Messiah, and either foretells him in word or
foreshadows him by time...Jesus ‘fulfilled’ it all in
the sense that what was predicted came to pass in him.”[23]
John R.W. Stott
|
“Therefore we give plēroō (‘fulfill’) exactly the same
meaning as in the formula quotations, which in the
prologue (Matt 1-2) have already laid stress on the
prophetic nature of the OT and the way it points to
Jesus.”[24]
D.A. Carson |
|
“Jesus came not to denigrate or displace either the law (in its
narrower sense) or the Old Testament (its wider sense);
he came to fulfill the law and so to establish it. That
law would stand ‘until heaven and earth disappear’ or
‘until everything is accomplished’ (Matt. 5:18)...So
serious a matter is the law that Jesus warns that if we
ignore that law (not Jesus’ teachings replacing the
law), or teach others to ignore parts of the law, except
for those parts which have been accomplished such as the
ceremonial parts of the law, we will meet with
disapproval in the kingdom of God (Matt. 5:19)!”[25]
Walter C. Kaiser
|
“Jesus ‘fulfils’ or ‘completes’ the law by bringing a new law
which transcends the old...The
‘fulfillment’ is eschatological: the
telos which the Torah anticipated,
namely, the Messiah, has come and
revealed the law’s definitive meaning.
Prophecy has been realized....Matthew
uses
plhrow most frequently to express the fulfillment
of an OT prophecy by Jesus.”[26]
W.D. Davies and D.C. Allison |
|
“Jesus fulfilled the Law in the sense that he gave it its full
meaning. He emphasized its deep,
underlying principles and total
commitment to it rather than mere
external acknowledgment and obedience.”[27]
NIV Study Bible |
“[T]he eschatological will of God—is the best interpretation of
Matthew 5:17...[Jesus’] teaching does
not abolish the Law, but brings it to
its eschatological climax....The
relationship of the Law to Jesus in
Matthew is, then, only one segment of
his salvation-historical,
promise-fulfillment scheme. Through it
Matthew integrates his stress on the
continuity of the Law—for the Law looks
ahead to, and is incorporated into, the
teaching of Jesus—and on its
discontinuty—for Jesus, not the Law, is
now the locus of God’s word to his
people.”[28]
Douglas J. Moo
|
|
“[I]t is best for us to understand
plhrwsai here as ‘fulfill’ in the sense of
‘bring to its intended meaning’—that is,
to present a definitive interpretation
of the law, something now possible
because of the presence of the Messiah
and his kingdom. Far from destroying the
law, Jesus’ teachings—despite their
occasionally strange sound—penetrate to
the divinely intended (i.e., the
telelogical) meaning of the law. Because
the law and the prophets pointed to him
and he is their goal, he is able now to
reveal their true meaning and so to
bring them to ‘fulfillment.’”[29]
Donald A. Hagner
|
“In light of Matthew’s use of this verb [plēroō]
elsewhere, and the evident importance it
has for his understanding of the
relation between the authoritative words
of the OT and their contemporary
outworking, the sense here is not likely
to be concerned either with Jesus’
actions in relation to the law or even
his teaching about it, but rather the
way in which he ‘fulfills’ the pattern
laid down in the law and the
prophets...The Torah, then, is not God’s
last word to his people, but is in a
sense provisional, looking forward to a
time of fulfillment through the
Messiah.”[30]
R.T. France |
|
“In Matthew’s view Jesus has come to ‘fulfill’ the law and the
prophets (5:17) by his actions and
teachings...Both here and at the end of
the teaching section of the Sermon on
the Mount (7:12), as well as in the
commandments to love God and neighbor
(22:40), Matthew treats Jesus’ teaching
as coextensive with the law and the
prophets.”[31]
Anthony J. Saldarini
|
|
“[Jesus]...goes on to relate his mission to the Scriptures, which
he ‘did not come to annul but to fill’
(Mt 5;17). He fills out the meaning of
their promises and warnings and is
himself the confirmation of these. He
fills out the meaning of their
expectations and looks for an even
deeper commitment to Torah than the
scholars and Pharisees prescribed or
exemplified (Mt 5:18-20). If his hearers
want to be people who have a natural
place in a world where God reigns, they
need to be whole, like God (Mt 5:48).”[32]
John Goldingay
|
|
“Since he does not ‘abolish’ the Law and the Prophets but
fulfills them (5:17), his disciples
likewise must not ‘abolish’ or ‘break’
the commandments but must instead
practice and teach them (5:19)...The
entire Old Testament is the expression
of God’s will, but it is to be obeyed
and taught from the perspective of how
Jesus ‘fulfills’ it through his
interpretation of its intent and
meaning. A disciple’s status in the
kingdom of heaven accords with whether
one trifles with the revealed will of
God or obeys and teaches it truly as the
Word of God.”[33]
Michael J. Wilkins
|
|
“[T]he language of 5:17 is likely to constitute a bridge between
the fulfillment of Scripture language of
the formula quotations and the
fulfilling of all righteousness which
Jesus expresses at his baptism...[T]he
interest at 5:17 is clearly with the
practical implementation of the
directives of the Law (and the
Prophets). The fulfillment language
represents a claim that Jesus’
programmatic commitment, far from
undercutting the role of the Law and the
Prophets, is to enable God’s people to
live out the Law more effectively.”[34]
John Nolland
|
In our Messianic faith community, it is quite popular to hear
rhetoric along the lines of, “You think that in
Yeshua fulfilling the Law it means prophecy; it
doesn’t! It means that He came to fill the Torah
up full of meaning.” These statements are too
often charged with negative emotions. It is
incorrectly thought that if a person thinks that
Yeshua’s fulfillment of the Torah regards any
kind of prophecy, that he or she is probably in
error. And, Messianic Jewish commentator David
H. Stern, in making some observations on Matthew
5:17, actually does miss something. He states,
“It is true that Yeshua kept the Torah
perfectly and fulfilled predictions of the
Prophets, but that is not the point here. Yeshua
did not come to abolish but ‘to make full’ (plêrôsai)
the meaning of what the Torah and the
ethical demands of the Prophets require.”[35]
It is absolutely appropriate to recognize that Yeshua’s fulfilling
the Torah does involve more than just His
accomplishing predictive prophecies. But equally
so, it is inappropriate to limit the meaning of
plēroō to just some kind of “perfection
of Torah” associated with His teachings and
interpretations of Moses, and His obedience to
the commandments. The text itself of Matthew
5:17 does not just say Yeshua came to fulfill
the Law, but ton nomon ē tous prophētas (ton
nomon h touß profhtaß), “the law and the prophets” (RSV). Because of the inclusion of
“the Prophets” in the fulfillment schema,
various interpreters think that they have a
legitimate reason to conclude that Messianic
prophetic accomplishment is exclusively what is
intended.
The verb plēroō, as noted above, can regard some kind of
perfection of something or bringing something
into perfection, but its usage throughout the
Gospel of Matthew—which by no means can be
casually disregarded—does serve to describe
prophetic fulfillment. The verb plēroō is
used twelve different instances in Matthew to
describe prophetic accomplishment.[36]
It is pointless to deny, especially with the
inclusion of the Torah and the Prophets together
in v. 17, how Messianic prophetic fulfillment
is a major part of what Yeshua is affirming He
came to do.
Putting the Torah and the Prophets together is something that is
very important for any Bible reader to see. In
the estimation of Davies and Allison, “Matthew
cannot simply let it be said that Jesus
fulfilled the law or that Jesus fulfilled the
prophets: he must tell us that he fulfilled
both.”[37]
There is definitely something to the inclusion
of the Prophets, along with the Torah, because
in Jewish theology the Pentateuch usually gets
more attention than the rest of the Tanach
canon. Hagner describes, “This elevation of the
prophets to the eternal worth of the law was not
a view held by the Jews of Jesus’ day...The
messianic age has dawned in history, and with it
comes the fulfillment of the prophetic
expectation.”[38]
Consequently, Yeshua’s fulfillment of the Torah
by His ministry is definitely connected with the
themes of the Prophets—not only the themes of
Moses.
Among Messianic interpreters, Hegg does take a slight issue with
the prophetic-exclusive theme adopted by
interpreters like Carson. He points out, “the
verb ‘fulfill’ is always in the passive mood:
‘that the words of prophet X might be
fulfilled.’ Yeshua, however, does not say
that the Torah and Prophets are ‘fulfilled’
(passive) in Him, but rather that He came ‘to
fulfill’ (active) them.”[39]
Yeshua the Messiah, being the Son of God,
obviously does possess the power to do more than
just accomplish the prophetic expectations of
the Torah by fulfilling it. Hegg goes on to
describe how, “He admonishes His talmidim both
‘to do’ and ‘to teach’ the Torah, meaning that
His having come to ‘fulfill’ the Torah is seen
in the way the Torah would be active in their
lives and the lives of those they would teach.”[40]
This is not just the Messiah’s followers
teaching only from the Messiah’s own teachings
and interpretations of the Torah, but how the
Messiah’s followers would teach from the Torah
with His example in mind.
The intention of interpreters who hold to Yeshua’s fulfillment of
the Torah only regarding prophecy, is obviously
so that once prophecies are accomplished, then
the Torah’s instructions themselves get
nullified or can be put aside in some way. But
even if you choose to look at plēroō in
v. 17 as exclusively pertaining to prophecy, to
claim that the Torah’s instructions get
abolished in the process is not at all a tenable
position. The Apostolic Scriptures, for example,
affirm that Yeshua’s sacrificial work has
inaugurated the era of the New Covenant (Luke
22:20; Hebrews 8:8-12), yet the prophesied New
Covenant involves a supernatural transcription
of the Torah’s commands onto the hearts of God’s
people (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Ezekiel 36:25-27).
Likewise, at the proclamation of the Word of
God, which can be viewed as the gospel, the
nations will come to Zion to be taught the Law,
resulting in peace (Isaiah 2:3; Micah 4:2). So,
even if you argue from Matthew 5:17 that Yeshua
came to only accomplish the prophetic
predictions of the Torah and Prophets—the Torah
is by no means to be considered relevant only
for the pre-resurrection era. From this
perspective, Davies and Allison conclude,
“[I]f the law is fulfilled, it cannot on that account be set aside.
Fulfillment can only confirm the Torah’s truth,
not cast doubt upon it. And while Jesus’ new
demands may surpass the demands of the OT, the
two are not contradictory...Rather do the words
of the Torah remain the words of God (cf. 15.4),
their imperatival force undiminished (cf. 5.18;
23.23).”[41]
Yeshua’s fulfilling the Torah and Prophets certainly does involve
His accomplishment of various Messianic
prophecies, which ultimately concern His
sacrifice for sins. The words of Isaiah 40:3, as
declared by John the Immerser, surely do strike
a chord: “A
voice is calling, ‘Clear the way for the
Lord
in the wilderness; make smooth in the desert a
highway for our God” (cf. Matthew 3:3). But
Yeshua also, in His ministry service, fills out
the substance of what Moses and the Prophets
anticipate. He redeems people from the slavery
of sin, like the Ancient Israelites were
delivered from Egypt (Exodus 20:2). He leads
people into greater holiness, just as the Torah
requires (Leviticus 19:2). Yeshua surely
demonstrates the imperative of Micah 6:8,
“...what does the
Lord
require of you but to do justice, [and] to love
kindness...?” In His ministry and teachings,
Yeshua’s focus on how to live is in continuity
with the requirements of Moses and the Prophets.
Kaiser specifically describes how “the prophets
never wearied of rebuking their listeners for a
religious sterility presented as a substitute
for the moral norms God wished to see,”[42]
and the same tenor is surely witnessed in our
Lord’s Sermon on the Mount.
One of the most important usages of the verb plēroō is seen
earlier in Matthew 3:15. At His immersion in the
Jordan River, Yeshua tells John, “in
this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all
righteousness.” Here, as in Matthew 5:17, the
aorist active infinitive verb plērōsai (plhrwsai)
is employed. This immersion formally began the
Messiah’s ministry, which would surely involve
the accomplishment of predictions seen in the
Torah and Prophets, but would also
involve significant healings, exorcisms,
salvation, and expository preaching on
and interpretation of the Torah and Prophets.
Yeshua’s fulfilling the Torah most certainly
involves His prophetic accomplishments, but it
involves, much more. The will of the Torah and
Prophets is seen in Yeshua’s life and ministry,
providing a legacy of proper holiness and
upstanding obedience that is to be emulated in
all of His disciples. Yeshua’s life and
teachings of fulfillment exist in symbiosis with
the Torah and Prophets—as understanding the
Tanach enables us to understand more about the
Messiah, and vice versa. Yet, within such a
symbiotic relationship, Yeshua’s fulfilling of
the Torah and Prophets does require that we let
Him as the Divine Messiah have the ultimate and
final authority for our halachah and
orthopraxy. The “sound words” that born again
Believers must first appeal to in their lives—by
the very virtue of Him saving us from our sins—are
“those of our Lord Yeshua the Messiah” (1
Timothy 6:3). As M. Eugene Boring properly
describes,
“Jesus’ declaration that his own life and teaching are the
definitive revelation of the will of God (cf.
11:25-27; 28:18-20) does indeed mean that
neither the written Torah nor its interpretation
in the oral tradition...is the final authority.”[43]
These sentiments run contrary to some teaching that we might hear
in today’s Messianic community (as especially
can be found within the self-labeled “Torah
movement”), where it is the Pentateuch, and not
the words of Messiah Yeshua, that is believed to
have the final say in all that we do.
Yeshua’s teaching is very clear that the Torah
and Prophets have authority. Yet, Yeshua
also says, “Heaven
and earth will pass away, but My words will not
pass away” (Matthew 24:35), and the Torah and
Prophets will in some way pass away with the old
creation at a future point in time (discussed
further). The permanence of Yeshua’s words into
the new, eternal creation that is coming,
requires that we hold them at a higher level
than Moses. So, how we learn as Messianic
Believers to have a high regard for the Torah,
the Prophets, and their ultimate realization in
Yeshua the Messiah, can be a challenge—but not
at all an impossible one if we are guided by the
Holy Spirit and thrust of the New Covenant.
France’s thoughts are well taken:
“[T]he authority of the law and the prophets is not abolished. They
remain the authoritative word of God. But their
role will no longer be the same, now that what
they pointed forward to has come, and it will be
for Jesus’ followers to discern in the light of
his teaching and practice what is now the right
way to apply those texts in the new situation
which his coming has created.”[44]
In the First Century C.E., Yeshua did have to come and challenge
some of the status quo, as practiced by various
Pharisaical leaders and scribal authorities, who
seem to have overlooked the Tanach’s emphasis on
acts of justice and human wholeness (Matthew
23:23, 27-28). Understanding the Messiah’s
mission, He requires us as His followers to
consider His example of fulfilling the will of
Moses and the Prophets. Our proper obedience to
the Scriptures begins with love for God and
neighbor,[45]
and in making sure that our heart attitude is
oriented properly so that even the thought of
sin is something that sickens us. Our obedience
to the Torah and Prophets, as born again
Believers, is necessarily tempered by our
knowing that Yeshua had to die because we
violated its commandments, and permanently
absorbed its capital punishment in His sacrifice
(Colossians 2:14).
Matthew 5:17 communicates how (1) Yeshua did indeed come to fulfill
the prophetic expectations of the Torah and
Tanach. In so doing (2) the Lord has fulfilled
all righteousness (Matthew 3:15) and brought the
Torah and Prophets to their dénouement or climax
via His ministry and atoning work. (3) As
Messiah followers, while His words stand as our
final authority, the authority of Moses and the
Prophets is upheld by the Savior we are to
emulate. He surely expects us to follow them
and heed their messages, which will in turn
only confirm His own message.
The Smallest Letter and Stroke
For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth
pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke
shall pass from the Law until all is
accomplished.
Matthew 5:18 builds on the theme of what the Messiah has just
stated in His mission of coming to “fulfill” the
Torah and the Prophets. The Lord strongly
asserts, “For
truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass
away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the
law until all is accomplished” (RSV). This also
concurs with what is seen in Luke 16:17, “But it
is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than
for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail.”
Obviously, Yeshua speaks about a high degree of
permanence for the Mosaic Law, which can only
reach some kind of termination “until all things
are accomplished” (HCSB).
Nowhere in Matthew 5:17-19—quite contrary to the thoughts of some
of today’s Christians—do we ever get the
impression that Yeshua the Messiah “fulfilled
and thus abolished” the Law of Moses by His
ministry activities. Quite the opposite is true:
Yeshua directs His listeners to pay attention to
the smallest features of the Torah. This does
not mean that some people have not tried to
ignore or even circumvent the words of the
Lord—they have! Stott’s thoughts, commenting on
the previous verse, are important to consider:
“In every generation of the Christian era there have been those who
could not accommodate themselves to Christ’s
attitude to the law. The famous second-century
heretic Marcion, who rewrote the New Testament
by eliminating its references to the Old,
naturally erased this passage. Some of his
followers went further. They dared to reverse
its meaning by exchanging the verbs so that the
sentence would read: ‘I have come not to fulfil
the law and the prophets, but to abolish them’!”[46]
V. 18 does not just begin with “For truly I say to you...” but
actually Amēn gar legō humin (amhn
gar legw umin), “For, amen, I say to you...” (NIGTC).[47]
Yeshua’s usage of “amen” is quite significant,
especially given the many usages of the root
a-m-n (!ma) throughout the Tanach,[48]
and how “Amen” as a carryover liturgical term
is not simply translated. Yeshua strongly “Amens,”
as it were, how the Torah will remain in effect
for God’s people heōs an parelthē ho ouranos
kai hē gē (ewß
an parelqh o ouranoß kai h gh), “until
heaven and earth disappear” (NIV). This by
necessity implies that the Torah will stay with
us for a very, very long time.
Have Heaven and Earth passed away? No. Yet,
there are interpreters who see Yeshua’s remark
as just being a colloquialism, and consider the
cosmos “passing away” as regarding until the
time of the new post-resurrection era
inaugurated by the work of the Messiah. Carson
is one who thinks that “all is accomplished,”
for example, “is best understood to refer to everything in
the law, considered under the law’s prophetic
function—viz., until all these things have taken
place as prophesied.”[49]
While Carson recognizes that within his view
“not one jot or tittle will fail of its
fulfillment,”[50]
he nevertheless is counted among those who think
that via such prophetic fulfillment, the Torah
is now a thing of past salvation history.
We should be consciously aware of how the clause heōs an panta
genētai (ewß
an panta genhtai)
has been improperly rendered in both the KJV and
NKJV as “till
all be/is fulfilled.” This is obviously a
problem, because Yeshua’s intent to fulfill the
Torah and Prophets in v. 17 is indicated by the
verb plēroō, and here in v. 18 ginomai
(ginomai) is instead what is used. Ginomai
is basically a
“to be”
verb, which in v. 18 would
obviously mean “to
occur as process or result,
happen, turn out, take place”
(BDAG).[51]
Within the Gospel of Matthew ginomai has
prophetic uses (1:22;
21:4; 24:6; 26:54, 56),
so it is correct to conclude that the Torah
remains effectual until the point of when “all
is accomplished” (NASU) as foretold in the
eschatological plan.
Is the point of “until
everything is accomplished”
(NIV) the period until right after the death and
resurrection of Yeshua? While various
interpreters of Matthew 5:17-19 draw this
conclusion, it is notably not a
conclusion made by all. The endurance of the
Torah as the Word of God, possessing relevance
and significant instruction for God’s people
until Heaven and Earth pass, as seen in v. 18,
is built upon sentiments such as Psalm 148:3-6:
“Praise
Him, sun and moon; praise Him, all stars of
light! Praise Him, highest heavens, and the
waters that are above the heavens! Let them
praise the name of the
Lord,
for He commanded and they were created. He has
also established them forever and ever; He has
made a decree which will not pass away.”
The cosmic Creation will endure l’ad l’olam (~lA[l d[l),
a very, very long time—to the point where John
says “I
saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first
heaven and the first earth passed away”
(Revelation 21:1). Similarly, we see Baruch 4:1
in the Apocrypha explaining how “the
law...endures for ever.” 4 Ezra 9:37 also
expresses, “the law...does not perish but
remains in its glory.” If the Torah does, in
fact, have a limited span of viability—then that
span did not end with the death and resurrection
of Yeshua. Such a span of viability for
instructing God’s people is in fact intended
to be just as long as the endurance of the
present universe. The smallest features of
the Torah remain relevant until we actually
arrive at the future point in salvation history
when the eternal state will be upon us, and we
enter into the new Creation.
Davies and Allison confirm how v. 18 “most
naturally suggests that there is still a long
period of time to elapse before the law passes
away.”[52]
Stott’s observation is that the Torah and the Prophets will only
“pass away in a mighty rebirth of the universe.”[53]
So, the only kind of event that would be
significant enough to render the Tanach
Scriptures inoperable would be a Second Big
Bang! Yeshua’s words “until heaven and earth
pass away” should not at all be taken as a
contrast between the pre- and post-resurrection
eras, but actually between the current age and
the future eternal state. Nolland comments how
v. 18 “seems most likely to be concerned to
guarantee a permanence of the Law until such
time as every item on the Law’s agenda has been
achieved, until all that it lays out as God’s
will for humankind has been accomplished.”[54]
While none of us should ever downplay the
significance of Yeshua’s death and resurrection,
atoning for our sins, there is still much
more on God’s agenda for humanity, foretold
in the Tanach, which we are still waiting for
the accomplishment of. It is quite obvious, for
example, that we have yet to see that
thousand-year Messianic Kingdom of total
shalom envelop Planet Earth:
“And
the wolf will dwell with the lamb, and the
leopard will lie down with the young goat, and
the calf and the young lion and the fatling
together; and a little boy will lead them. Also
the cow and the bear will graze, their young
will lie down together, and the lion will eat
straw like the ox. The nursing child will play
by the hole of the cobra, and the weaned child
will put his hand on the viper's den. They will
not hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain, for
the earth will be full of the knowledge of the
Lord
as the waters cover the sea” (Isaiah 11:6-9).
Even though an essential peace has been restored to individuals, by
the salvation available in Yeshua, there are
still eschatological dimensions that have yet to
be realized. While it is correct to claim that
the Tanach Scriptures remain viable only until
that point that their prophecies are all
accomplished, we have not at all reached such
a point in history.
And the need to heed the instructions of the Torah is upheld by
Yeshua to its finest details. The Lord is clear
to explain how “till
heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one
tittle will by no means pass from the law” (NKJV).
Rendered as “not an iota, not a dot” in the RSV,
iōta hen ē mia keraia
(iwta en
h mia keraia), would immediately
direct a First Century audience to consider the
formation of Hebrew letters in scribal
dictation. Anyone who has studied Biblical
Hebrew should be aware of how if attention to
how letters are written is not maintained, it
can change the meaning of an entire word or
sentence. Stern, rendering v. 18 with “not so
much as a yud or a stroke will pass from
the Torah” in his CJB, aptly describes,
“Yud is the smallest letter of the
Hebrew alphabet and is used...to render Greek
iôta, the smallest letter in the Greek
alphabet. Only a small stroke
distinguishes one Hebrew letter from another—for
example dalet (d) from resh (r) or
beit (b) from kaf
(k).”[55]
Another example surely to be considered would be the difference
between a hey (h) and a chet (h).
There is, in fact, a well-known Rabbinic story that describes the
changing of Sarai’s name (yrf)
to Sarah (hrf; Genesis 17:15), which was accomplished by the
removing of the yod (y). It concludes
that the letter yod actually cried out
from generation to generation, until Moses
changed Hoshea’s ([vAh) name to Joshua (Yehoshua,
[WvAhy;
Numbers 13:16):
“Now
if the Y that I took away from the name of Sarah
[changing it from Sarah to Sarah] stood crying
for so many years until Joshua came and I added
the Y [removed from Sarah’s name] to his name,
as it is said, ‘And Moses called Oshea, the son
of Nun, Jehoshua’ (Num. 13:16), how much the
more will a complete passage of Scripture [cry
out if I remove that passage from its rightful
place]!’” (b.Sandedrin 107a).[56]
Considering this Rabbinic view, Craig S. Keener properly remarks,
“Jesus makes the same point from this tradition
that later rabbis did: even the smallest details
of God’s law are essential.”[57]
We should not at all think that Yeshua’s reference to “jots and
tittles,” which can change the appearance of
various Hebrew letters—and thus how specific
words read—is an indication that Divine
revelation can only be communicated in Hebrew.
V. 18’s reference to a keraia (keraia) or “any
thing projecting like a horn”
(LS),[58]
is noted by Nolland in the Greek language to
relate to “projections on letters, to
breathings, and to accents”[59]
which can also change the meanings of words.
Paying attention to the slight differences in
vowel sounds, like how ēta (h) and
epsilon-iota (ei), are almost the same but
slightly different, could alter the meaning of
an important word. Even in the English language,
sometimes we have to be aware of the differences
between a capital P and R,[60]
or a lowercase b and k.[61]
Hagner considers Yeshua’s reference to “the smallest letter or
stroke” not passing away to be “a deliberate
hyperbole—an overstatement that is designed to
drive home the main point that the law be fully
preserved.”[62]
Certainly if Yeshua fulfills both prophecy and
the spiritual will of God contained in the
Tanach, then in seeing how it is realized in His
life and ministry, we do need to be textually
conscious of it. The words of the Psalmist
communicate the spiritual imperative, “Your
hands made me and fashioned me; give me
understanding, that I may learn Your
commandments” (Psalm 119:73), and we are to see
this realized in the life of Yeshua. Still, a
place in the Torah where a single stroke can
change the meaning of a passage would be the
different Hebrew witnesses of Psalm 22:16.[63]
The details of Scripture do matter.
Not at all to be overlooked, similar to what is seen in v. 17
previously, is that it is quite significant that
Yeshua uses “Law” as a reference to the entire
Tanach, and not to the Pentateuch exclusively.
This is because the Tanach: Law, Prophets, and
Writings, all compose torah (hrAT)
or instruction from God that must be taken
seriously. The usage of “Law” in reference to
parts of the Tanach other than just the
Pentateuch is something that the Apostle Paul
also employs, as in 1 Corinthians 14:12 he says,
“In
the Law it is written...,” and then quotes from
Isaiah 28:11.
The Greatest and Least in the Kingdom
Whoever then annuls one of the least of these
commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom
of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them,
he shall be called great in the kingdom of
heaven.
It is not enough for Yeshua to simply require His followers to pay
attention to the smallest details of the Tanach
Scriptures, until we arrive at the future New
Creation sometime long into the future (v. 18).
The Lord actually assigns eschatological
penalties to those who would annul or relax the
Torah’s commandments: “Anyone
who breaks one of the least of these
commandments and teaches others to do the same
will be called least in the kingdom of heaven” (NIV).
At the same time, rewards are promised to those
who will uphold the Torah’s commandments:
“whoever practices and teaches these commands
will be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (NIV).
The status of “least” will be given to the one who annuls the
“least” of the Torah’s commandments. Being
elachistos (elacistoß) likely “pert.
to being considered of very little importance,
insignificant, trivial”
(BDAG)[64]
within the Kingdom of God. But being “least” in
God’s Kingdom does not mean being removed from
it. Wilkins properly remarks, “The rank of ‘least’ should not be taken to indicate exclusion from
the kingdom...‘Least’ and ‘great’ are ways to
acknowledge in this present life those who have
been faithful in word and deed to the revealed
will of God as it is taught by Jesus.”[65]
Being “least” and being “great” in God’s Kingdom
concerns the rewards that will be given to
Messiah’s followers when He returns to establish
His reign (Isaiah 62:11; Revelation 22:12).
Those who are “least” actually make it into the
Kingdom, but will apparently not be given very
much.
Yeshua’s reference to “the least of these commandments” is likely
rooted within contemporary Jewish teaching of
His time, which did classify various Torah
commandments along the lines of some being
“light” and others being “heavy.”[66]
It was said, “Be meticulous in a small religious
duty as in a large one, for you do not know what
sort of reward is coming for any of the various
religious duties” (m.Avot 2:1).[67]
Some of the thoughts regarding what would be
considered the “least” and “greatest”
commandments of the Torah for one to follow,
include:
·
least commandments such as those to tithe on produce (Leviticus
27:30; Deuteronomy 14:22), and great
commandments such as profaning God’s name,
misusing the Sabbath, or refusing to enact
social justice (Exodus 20:2-8; Micah 6:8)[68]
·
least commandments about remembering a bird’s nest (Deuteronomy
22:6-7), and great commandments about honoring
parents (Exodus 20:12; Deuteronomy 5:16)[69]
Yeshua does warn that those who break what are considered “lesser”
commandments in the Torah will be penalized. The
verb luō (luw),
rendered as “annuls” (NASU) or “relaxes” (RSV/ESV),
while meaning “to
loosen,
i.e. weaken, relax” (LS), can also
most certainly regard “to resolve a whole
into its parts, to dissolve, break up” (LS).[70]
Teaching that is delivered by Messiah’s
followers, with the explicit intent to demean,
downgrade, or communicate a less-than-favorable
view of the Torah’s commandments, will not merit
one great rewards in God’s Kingdom.
Of course, it should not be surprising that some interpreters of
Matthew 5:17-19 wish to associate tōn entolōn
(twn entolwn)
or “these commandments,” as being something
other than the commandments of God in the Torah.
Some conclude that the commandments which Yeshua
teaches on in His Sermon on the Mount are those
which Christians will be exclusively held
accountable for either upholding, or denying, as
relevant instruction. Carson is reflective of
this position:
“The entire Law and Prophets are not scrapped by Jesus’ coming but
fulfilled. Therefore the commandments of these
Scriptures—even the least of them...—must be
practiced. But the nature of the practicing has
already been affected by vv.17-18. The law
pointed forward to Jesus and his teaching; so it
is properly obeyed by conforming to his word.”[71]
The thought here is that by keeping or paying attention to only
the Messiah’s specific teachings, His followers
will then be considered as having obeyed God’s
previous Law.
I do not think any mature Believer in his or her right mind will
disagree with the fact that we certainly need
to adhere to the Messiah’s teachings. And
indeed, if we choose to disregard or underplay
any of the specific areas that He expounds upon in
His Sermon on the Mount—(extreme) penalties
should be issued! What Yeshua has said from His
mouth are words that will endure beyond this
universe (Matthew 24:35; Mark 13:31; Luke
21:33). But the conclusion that Messiah
followers keep the Torah by only following
Yeshua’s explicit commandments is very poor
logic. It is almost like saying:
Ignore the Law of Moses, keep Christ’s teaching,
and by keeping Christ’s teaching you will be
keeping the Law of Moses which you are to pay
little attention to.
While some might think this extrapolation is a bit overblown,
consider how many evangelical Christians today
are really acquainted with the Torah and Tanach.
How many of today’s Believers are really keen on
studying the Old Testament, if for any other
reason than just seeing how the Messiah’s
fulfills its predicative prophecies? Not
enough. It is heartbreaking to consider how
many modern Christian people, quite sadly and
lamentably, may very well be considered least in
the Kingdom. They have no clue what Moses’
Teaching really is, and not enough would be able
to point out some major Messianic prophecies
from the Tanach, and how Yeshua accomplished
them in the Gospels. Too few have the ability to
understand the Disciples’ claim, “We
have found Him of whom Moses in the Law and
also the Prophets wrote—Yeshua of Nazareth,
the son of Joseph” (John 1:45). Too many of
today’s Believers have widely chosen to relegate
the Law and the Prophets to the dustbin of
Biblical history, and there can be no
doubting that today’s Church is suffering from
it.
In much of historic Protestant Christian thought, particularly that
of Reformed theology, and to a lesser extent
Wesleyan theology, it has been held that the
only parts of the Torah which have been
invalidated as a part of the Messiah’s arrival
are those of the “ceremonial law.” This
“ceremonial law” included things like the
Levitical priesthood, circumcision, and the
kosher dietary laws. All of the prescriptions of
what are believed to compose the “moral law” of
the Old Testament, were never nullified, and are
statutes to which God will hold His people to
high account. Even though this view does hold to
an artificial subdivision of God’s commandments
between so-called “moral” and “ceremonial”
statutes, it still upholds the principle that
most of the Law of Moses—which does instruct
people on ethics and morality—is to be followed.
While needing to be informed more from First
Century Judaism, this is a view definitely to
be preferred over that which says Believers
need to only be concerned with the
Messiah’s teachings, which have now basically
replaced Moses’ Teaching.
I myself was raised in a denominational tradition which taught that
the moral law of the Old Testament was still to
be followed by Christians. Commenting on Matthew
5:17, John Wesley stated how Jesus Christ came “not...to
destroy—the moral law, but to fulfil—To
establish, illustrate, and explain its highest
meaning, both by [His] life and doctrine.”[72]
I also have Reformed and Calvinist strands in my
family as well, both of which also held the
“moral law” of the Old Testament to remain
valid, and concurrent with this that Christian
people are to be very hard working, responsible,
and productive citizens. I have never had to be
convinced, in general principle, that the Mosaic
Law is relevant instruction for born again
Believers. My Christian family would be among
those who would declare, along with King David,
“The
law of Your mouth is better to me than thousands
of gold and silver pieces” (Psalm
119:72). In the generations of my family, you
will even find those who insisted on the keeping
of a rather rigid Sunday Sabbath.
Millions of Christians the world over, for many centuries, have
looked to the Mosaic Law for teaching and
instruction. It has surely informed their
understanding of Yeshua’s Sermon on the Mount,
and the ethical code that the Savior insists His
followers to adhere to. While their numbers are
waning, there are many evangelical Christians
today who look to the Torah’s commandments on
human morality, as necessary things to be
followed as a matter of piety and holiness.[73]
These are people who do not look at the Old
Testament as a piece of the Bible to be
relegated to past history, but they allow it to
inform their view of the world today. They
understand how, in the words of Nolland,
“Clearly nothing less than commitment to the
complete will of God as expressed in the entire
Law will do,”[74]
as their obedience to God is motivated by love
for Him (Deuteronomy 6:5). If anything, today’s
Christians who already adhere to what they
consider the “moral law” to be, simply need to
add a few more things to what they are already
doing.
Those Christians over the centuries, who have highly valued the
Mosaic Law and principles of the Old Testament,
looking to its instruction as a matter of proper
obedience to God and emulation of the ministry
of Jesus Christ—however incomplete their view of
the Torah might seem to today’s Messianics—will
surely be considered great in the Kingdom of
Heaven. These are Believers who have truly
lived forth the imperative, “Let
your light shine before men in such a way that
they may see your good works, and glorify your
Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 5:16), and “In
everything, therefore, treat people the same way
you want them to treat you, for this is the Law
and the Prophets” (Matthew 7:12). They have
lived forth the imperatives of service to one’s
fellow human beings as required by Moses, the
Prophets, and Messiah Yeshua:
“Then the King will say to those on His right,
‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit
the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation
of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave Me
something to eat; I was thirsty, and you
gave Me something to drink; I was a
stranger, and you invited Me in; naked, and you
clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I
was in prison, and you came to Me.’ Then the
righteous will answer Him, ‘Lord, when did we
see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and
give You something to drink? And when did
we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or
naked, and clothe You? When did we see You sick,
or in prison, and come to You?’ The King will
answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to
the extent that you did it to one of these
brothers of Mine, even the least of
them, you did it to Me’” (Matthew 25:34-40).
Keener describes in his commentary, “While various groups of
Christians today may differ concerning exactly
how Jesus intended his disciples to interpret
the law, one point is clear: Jesus was not an
antinomian. He expected his followers to
understand and apply the moral principles
already revealed in the Scriptures.”[75]
Once you already believe that the Torah, in
general ethical practice, is to be followed—then
any other areas one might consider to be a bit
more “ceremonial” only need to be studied out
with time and research (discussed further). If
we consider the Torah’s regulations of one’s
business or farming practices to be useful in
guiding our actions today, why should we not
think that God had our well being today also
in mind in commanding that His people keep the
seventh-day holy, or abstain from eating certain
kinds of meats? Is He not concerned with our
physical health every bit as much as with our
mental and societal health?
In Stott’s thought, “To disregard a ‘least’ commandment in the
law...is to demote oneself into a ‘least’
subject in the kingdom; greatness in the kingdom
belongs to those who are faithful in doing and
teaching the whole moral law.”[76]
Because ethical and moral commandments compose
the majority of the Torah’s instruction—even
down to what some think are “least”
principles—many faithful Christians of today and
yesteryear will merit the status of “great” in
the Kingdom. Unfortunately, due to the
still-maturing spirituality of much of today’s
Messianic movement, many people in our faith
community do not acknowledge this. Rather than
striving to focus on what they have in common,
first, with our Christian brothers and
sisters (cf. Ephesians 4:1-7), they instead
prefer to (harshly and) unnecessarily judge
them. While there are Christian theological
traditions that have absolutely considered the
Torah to be a thing of the past, and of no
relevance to Messiah followers (such as
dispensationalism), this does not include
everyone. Furthermore, consider how it is
only the Lord, and Him alone, who gets to
determine the status of “least” for anyone who
enters into His Kingdom—just as He is the only
One who determines who will not enter into His
Kingdom at all (Matthew 13:41).
I do not think that it is wise when some of
today’s Messianic Believers haphazardly consider
various Christians “least” in the Kingdom. The status of being “least” can actually apply
to anyone who claims faith in Yeshua. There have
been plenty of Messianics who have overlooked
important parts of the Torah’s instruction,
including some of the specific areas highlighted
in the Sermon on the Mount. Some consider Torah
observance to exclusively compose things like
the seventh-day Sabbath, appointed times of
Leviticus 23, or kosher dietary laws. One’s
heart attitude toward others, morality in
functioning in the world, sexual ethics,
business practices, etc., are things that are
viewed as just not being that important. Could
Messianics who overlook these things be
considered “least”? Mature Believers have the
ability to properly balance outward actions,
which possess great value and blessings when
followed, along with moral instruction
that is to regulate how we relate to and
interact with other people. The value of moral
commandments that are largely “great,” and
outward commandments that are often considered
“least,” both have to be properly maintained in
the orthopraxy of a redeemed saint.
How we learn to do this is not always easy, because it not only
requires us to possess a heart and mind that
have been changed by the Holy Spirit, but we
might have to even do some work and study in
trying to discern how we should properly live.
We will have to acknowledge in our studies how
the subject of the Law has been approached by
various Christians throughout history. Wilkins
explains, “Some contend that none of [the Law]
applies to Jesus unless it is explicitly
reaffirmed in the New Testament, while others
say that all of the Old Testament applies unless
it is explicitly revoked in the New Testament.
Both of these extremes should be avoided in the
light of Jesus’ statements in 5:17-20.”[77]
Yeshua’s intention was not to come to the Earth
to abolish and render inoperative Moses’
Teaching. Still, it would be hard to argue that
His sacrifice for us at Golgotha (Calvary) has
not inaugurated some changes, in least in terms
of how we look at the Levitical priesthood and
animal sacrifices of the Torah (cf. Hebrews
7:12), which were incapable of providing final
atonement for human sin (cf. Hebrews 10:2-3).
Even with the Levitical priesthood and animal sacrifices of the
Torah largely put aside (Hebrews 7:19), at least
until the Millennial Kingdom (cf. Ezekiel chs.
40-44), there is still a great deal of the Torah
that can be followed practically in
today’s world. Taking the Sabbath day as a day
of rest and refreshment, remembering the
appointed times as memorials throughout the
year, not eating certain things even if entirely
for health reasons, and being conscious of
instructions that regulate sexuality—are all
things that we can follow and benefit from. They
will not only help our bodies, but they will
teach us important things about God’s holiness
and His plan of salvation history (cf.
Colossians 2:17). They help us learn more,
not less, about how Yeshua lived. And, they
allow us to express continuity with the Jewish
community, and can be used as ways to
communicate, when appropriate, the gospel
message.[78]
Yet, there are still instructions in the Torah, which for
some reason or another, have naturally reached
their end and cannot be followed. This is
different than abolishing the Torah. Some of
the Torah’s commandments were not followed by
the Jewish people of Yeshua’s time, because they
regulated Ancient Israel’s economy within the
Ancient Near East (ANE). Obviously, commandments
that have a termination point “until the Xth
generation” cannot be followed by virtue of
possessing a timestamp. Instructions regulating
Ancient Israel’s slave code cannot be followed
today, and no Biblical scholar—even in the most
rigid branch of Orthodox Judaism—would argue
that slavery should be practiced in the modern
era. We read instruction in the Torah that
concerns a rather agrarian level of technology,
and not the machine or computer ages.
If we completely ignored commandments in the Pentateuch that could
only be followed by Ancient Israel several
millennia ago, then we might be considered
“abolishing” the Torah. But if we are able
students of God’s Word, even if we might not be
able to follow some of those commandments, we can
still learn very important things about God’s
character, His interactions with ANE society,
and His general concern for the world. While a
surface reading of some commandments might make
us think that the Torah is archaic by our modern
standards, for the Thirteenth Century B.C.E.,
Israel’s Law might have been very subversive and
radical when compared to the law codes of
Mesopotamia, Egypt, or Canaan.
While Yeshua stated quite clearly that He did not come to abolish
the Torah, His fulfillment of the Torah can
include some post-resurrection changes and/or
expansions in its application. Ancient Judaism,
by the very virtue of the debates over halachah
(hklh), recognized that there was flexibility
in Torah application long before Yeshua
arrived—and today’s Messianic Believers should
likewise be flexible over various issues. This
is an area where consulting the Jewish
theological tradition can definitely be helpful.
France validly states, “To speak of a change in application of the
law is not to regard it now as discarded.”[79]
Colossians 2:14 does not at all say that the Law
was nailed to the cross as God’s standard of
holiness; it says that the record of human sin
and its prescribed penalties were nailed to the
cross. If capital punishment is largely a thing
of the past—now absorbed in Yeshua’s
sacrifice—the standard that required the
Messiah’s death is still very much to be
considered sin, albeit with a death penalty
that has now been remitted by His shed blood!
Changes to the Torah beyond this are like
recognizing the gender equality that Yeshua’s
work has restored (Galatians 3:28; contra
Genesis 3:16), might see the position of women
significantly elevated and some previous
authority structures reworked, but the basic
instructions of childrearing and of men also
leading the family remain intact. General
precepts like the Ten Commandments still demand
our attention. Murder is still murder,
homosexuality is still unacceptable, and pork is
still unclean. However, instruction that largely
had a specific ANE context for Ancient Israel in
mind, should inform us when we make life
decisions, but might not always be enough for
modern people.[80]
In order to be considered “great” in God’s Kingdom, we have to
always consider the witness of His commandments
in the Torah. If we consider them as completely
irrelevant and disregard or entirely ignore them
in our theological deliberations, we may somehow
end up becoming “least.”
The Law of Christ versus the Torah of Moses?
Believers in Messiah Yeshua (Christ Jesus) have to affirm that He
did not come to overthrow or render inoperative
the Torah (Matthew 5:17), but because of His
atoning sacrifice, there have been some changes
inaugurated as a natural result of it. The Torah
by no means has been abrogated as valid
instruction, but its application is surely to be
understood in light of the new,
post-resurrection realities resulting via His
fulfilling of it. How wide a degree have we seen
some shifts take place?
It is sometimes thought in New Testament studies that Yeshua and
His half-brother James both held a rather
conservative, rather standard Jewish view of the
Mosaic Law. Paul, on the other hand, is thought
to hold to a rather liberal view of the Mosaic
Law, and frowned from time to time on Believers
thinking about “works.” This is, of course, not
the view of everyone—and should not be the
view of any Messianic. Paul viewed people as
being saved by God’s grace and not human works
(Ephesians 2:8-9), but that good works were to
be evidence of such salvation (Ephesians 2:10).
The good Apostle wrote Timothy, “If
anyone advocates a different doctrine and does
not agree with sound words, those of our Lord
Yeshua the Messiah, and with the doctrine
conforming to godliness, he is conceited and
understands nothing” (1 Timothy 6:3-4a). Any
kind of proper doctrine or theology must confirm
to the message of Yeshua’s words: principally
that of His Sermon on the Mount, which itself is
prefaced with the remark that He did not come to
abolish the Torah.
Paul’s own words need to be held to the standard that he himself set.
It is really not that difficult to see how what
are commonly thought to be anti-Torah statements
in his letters, actually do align with the tenor
of
Matthew 5:17-19, when a little more
investigation is conducted. Romans 10:4, “Christ
is the end of the law” (NASU), is easily
explained when one looks at the different
meanings of telos (teloß)—a quite notable one being “the
goal toward which a movement is being directed,
end, goal, outcome”
(BDAG)[81]—with
the Torah pointing to the goal of Messiah. No
termination of the Torah’s relevance for the
saints need be implied. Romans 10:4 is an
excellent example of where people might try to
pit Yeshua against Paul, with the two in
contradiction, but this is completely
unnecessary. It is to be realized, though, that
the Apostle Peter warned that there are some
difficult things stated in Paul’s letters, which
people will twist around (2 Peter 3:15-16). Just
consider how many people today make the severe
mistake of thinking that the Apostle Paul is
writing directly to them, when in fact he
is writing to a specific First Century audience
that a letter is labeled by?
Even with a few basic guidelines in place—like making a conscious
effort to consider the ancient circumstances of
Paul’s letters—many of today’s scholastic
interpreters think that the Torah of Moses has
now been replaced by an independent Law of
Christ. One verse that receives a great deal of
attention, in support of this concept, is
Galatians 6:2: “Bear
one another's burdens, and thereby fulfill the
law of Christ.” None of us should ever think
that bearing one another’s burdens, serving one
another as fellow brothers and sisters, is
wrong! But is this ton nomon tou Christou
(ton nomon tou Cristou) some kind of
instruction that is different from the Torah of
Moses? Ben Witherington III mistakenly claims, “…by
‘the Law of Christ’, Paul does not mean Christ’s
interpretation of the still binding Mosaic Law,
nor even the Torah of the Messiah in some
general sense not based in the actual experience
of Jesus, including his death on the cross. The
Apostle…is…perfectly capable of speaking of two
different Laws.”[82]
The challenge with trying to pit the Torah of Moses against an
independent, and completely separate Law of
Christ, is not that the Apostle Paul is
concerned that Believers emulate Yeshua’s
self-sacrificial example. He is. The
challenge is where interpreters who hold the
“law of Christ” as something independent from
the Torah have to look to for its principles:
the Sermon on the Mount. The so-called
independent Law of Christ is viewed to basically
be the Sermon on the Mount, something to be
followed by all of His disciples. But in order
to understand the Sermon on the Mount, one has
to understand Yeshua’s imperative that His
followers possess good works (Matthew 5:16), and
that His mission was by no means one of
abolishing Moses’ Teaching (Matthew 5:17).
Yeshua’s teaching in the Sermon on the Mount is
predicated, in fact, by one understanding
Moses’ Teaching. Far from the Law of Christ
being an independent series of instruction; it
is rather “the
Torah's true meaning, which the Messiah
upholds” (Galatians 6:2, CJB). In following the
Torah by the example the Lord has left us—“the
Torah of Messiah” as it were—we will most
definitely, as Paul affirms, be concerned with
the requirement to love one another (Romans
13:10).
Upholding the Mosaic Torah via the example of Messiah Yeshua will
mean that born again Believers are going to be
tempered by a great deal of love and mercy for
others. When today’s Messianics see other people
not performing some of its outward commandments,
it is their responsibility to lead by a good and
positive life example, and demonstrate how
following such commandments are beneficial to
one’s well being. They have a responsibility of
knowing why they believe what they
believe—because they will be asked questions—and
any questions, comments, or criticisms should
not be responded to in a mean-spirited rebuke or
simplistic sound byte, but instead with
fair-minded answers (cf. 1 Peter 3:15-16). In
our generation, especially as today’s
evangelical Christians desire a return to more
of the instruction of the Old Testament, the
Messianic movement will be experiencing
significant growth, and we have to be ready.
Even a relatively liberal commentator like
Boring recognizes that when some Christians read
Matthew 5:17-19, various questions can be asked:
“Modern Christians sometimes read New Testament commands that their
church does not practice...and are perplexed by
their own question (not merely the criticism of
outsiders), ‘What does it mean that the Bible
says “do this” but our church, which claims to
“believe the Bible,” does not do it?’ The
prefatory declaration of 5:17 is a preemptive
strike at one some Christian readers might think
when they read 5:21-48, and as they reflect on
the fact that their church simply no longer
practices some of the clear commands of the
Bible: circumcision, the food laws, animal
sacrifice, (the Sabbath?)”[83]
France’s words are a little more to the point, as he thinks that
Yeshua’s upholding of the Torah is nuanced, lest
today’s Christians think that the more
“ceremonial” aspects of the Torah—should still
considered as valid 0r relevant. He offers the
summary paragraph,
“If that is what Matthew intended, the interpreter must face the
fact that this teaching is out of step with the
overall thrust of NT Christianity and with the
almost universal consensus of Christians ever
since, at least with regard to the more
ceremonial aspects of the OT law, particularly
its sacrificial provisions. The Letter to the
Hebrews is clear that these can have no further
place after the one perfect sacrifice has been
offered by Christ. Paul, while his attitude to
the law provides a scope for a rich variety of
interpretations and doctoral dissertations, uses
language about freedom from the law (Gal 5:1-6)
or being dead to the law (Rom 7:1-6; Gal 2:19)
and about Christ as the end of the law (Rom
10:4; cf. Gal 3:24-25) which sits very
uncomfortably with a view that Torah observance
is unchanged since the coming of the Messiah.
Under his and Peter’s guidance the NT church
found it necessary to abandon the OT food laws
as binding on all Christians (Acts 11:2-10; Rom
14:14).”[84]
France’s opening words about the “universal consensus” are probably
a bit overblown, but he is very right about the
Pauline Epistles being a place “for a rich
variety of interpretations and doctoral
dissertations.” What this means is that anyone
interpreting or addressing Yeshua’s view of the
Torah, has to remain informed about Paul’s
writing about the Torah—and no Messianic can
afford to teach on the Gospels, and remain
ignorant of Paul, or vice versa. In fact,
the areas of the Apostolic Scriptures that
France refers to above should not at all be
taken as complete and total abolitions of the
Torah, as they were all delivered in specific
contexts. They may reflect a moving forward in
God’s plan of salvation history, or a moderation
of an audience’s attitude that focused on one
part of the Torah, over and against a more
important part. To briefly summarize:
·
The Epistle to the Hebrews does discuss the animal
sacrifices of the Torah, and how Yeshua’s
sacrifice and Melchizedekian priesthood are
superior to the Levitical sacrifices and
priesthood, providing final atonement. But
Hebrews 7:18 says that there has been a “setting
aside” of the Levitical sacrifices and
priesthood, and no dishonor to the Levitical
sacrifices and priesthood is issued by the
author of Hebrews. Those who hold to a
pre-millennial eschatology realize that at some
future point in history, the Levitical
sacrifices and priesthood will be reestablished,
if for any other reason simply to accomplish
prophecy (Daniel 9:27; Matthew 24:15).[85]
·
Galatians 5:1-6
does not speak about non-Jewish Believers
possessing a “freedom” from the Torah, as though
they do not have to follow any of it. Paul’s
words are targeted at the message of the
Judaizers/Influencers, who were requiring the
Galatians to become formal proselytes to
Judaism, in order to truly be considered members
of God’s people. For some reason or another,
what their message advocated would lead the
Galatians back into the same kind of spiritual
bondage and activities that they should have
left behind in paganism. It would surely get
them focused off the need to love others.[86]
·
Both Galatians 2:19 and Romans 7:1-6 describe a
pre-salvation state of a person who is aware of
the Torah’s instruction. Because of the
sacrifice of Yeshua the Messiah, those who place
their trust in Him are now to be considered dead
to the Torah’s ability to condemn unrepentant
sinners. Only a specific part of the Torah’s
instruction is rendered invalid: its capital
punishment.[87]
·
The term telos in Romans 10:4 should not be
translated as “end,” which to the uncritical eye
is considered “termination.” The TNIV is a
modern version which presents a better
understanding: “Christ
is the culmination of the law so that there may
be righteousness for everyone who believes.”[88]
·
While there is instruction in the Torah of a much higher importance
than the kosher dietary laws, there is no
explicit claim in the Apostolic Scriptures that
they were abolished. Peter states to Cornelius
the interpretation of his vision of the sheet as
God cleansing all human beings (Acts
10:1-17; 11:2-10; cf. 10:28), not meats.
Paul’s writing in Romans 14:14 concerns what was
being served during Roman fellowship meals, as
some of the meat was koinos (koinoß)
or “common” (Romans 14:14, LITV) to
certain man-made standards, a different term
than what God considers akathartos (akaqartoß) or tamei (amj),
meaning “unclean” (Leviticus 11; Deuteronomy
14).[89]
The Torah’s instructions as upheld by Yeshua the Messiah do have a
different emphasis than many people who label
themselves as “Torah observant” often do. A
proper Torah observance, as seen in the ministry
of Yeshua, is more concerned about bearing
another’s burdens and in serving one another
(Philippians 2:3-4). It is quite focused upon
one’s heart attitude, and with what it means to
love others by the imperative: “Greater
love has no one than this, that one lay down his
life for his friends” (John 15:13). The writings
of the Apostolic Scriptures are thoroughly based
on this foundational principle. While keeping
outward commandments is most certainly a part of
emulating Yeshua’s life, it has to be coupled
with implementing Yeshua’s ethical teachings on
Moses. And if one might think that only the
Biblical command to love is all that is
important, certainly much historic Protestant
teaching has rightly stood against this. Stott
astutely points out how “the so-called ‘new morality’” that
advocates “no law any longer binds Christian
people except the law of love”[90]
is one that is totally wrong. Following God’s
command to love others is, in fact, what is to
guide His people into further obedience as
they strive to be a good witness to a world
that needs His salvation.
Maturing Toward Greatness in God’s Kingdom
How do mature Believers learn to balance Moses’
Teaching, the Prophets, and Yeshua’s instruction
all together? Clearly, those who are able to teach and exposit upon the
Torah and Prophets, and highly maintain the
directives of Yeshua’s Sermon on the Mount—are
those who will be considered very great in the
Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 5:19)!
Yeshua’s fulfilling of the Torah and Prophets is something that
possesses several important aspects. Yeshua (1)
came to accomplish critical predicative
prophecies as the Messiah, which involved not
only His sacrifice for sins, but (2) a proper
interpretation of Moses’ Teaching and the
admonitions of the Prophets, which should lead
to (3) His teaching’s expected implementation by
His followers. Yeshua’s fulfilling of the Torah
and Prophets by no means can abolish them—but
makes them quite important to understand as we
seek to understand His own teachings, ministry,
and mission. As Messiah followers today, we are
called by Him to teach and uphold the continued
authority of the Torah, and we are to be
empowered to surely understand the aspects of
the Sermon on the Mount that He specifically chose
to highlight from the Tanach: murder (Matthew
5:21-26), adultery (Matthew 5:27-30), divorce
(Matthew 5:31-32), oaths (Matthew 5:33-37), an
eye-for-an-eye (Matthew 5:38-42), and love and
hatred (Matthew 5:43-47). The Sermon on the
Mount is appropriately summarized with the word,
“Therefore
you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father
is perfect” (Matthew 5:48). Each Believer is
to strive toward this high standard of maturity
throughout his or her life.
Within Yeshua’s Sermon on the Mount is also the admonition, “For
I say to you that unless your righteousness
surpasses that of the scribes and
Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of
heaven” (Matthew 5:20). This can be taken a
number of ways: (1) entry into the Kingdom by
human means must exceed the most rigid outward
standards of these First Century Jewish sects,
or (2) going beyond the (mere) outward standard
of the scribes and Pharisees, maturing in one’s
heart reasonings and thought processes, also is
required. One could also simply think that
Matthew 5:20 presents such a high standard for
Messiah followers to reach toward, that it is
impossible to fully reach, requiring people
to eventually fall on the mercy of God for entry
into His Kingdom. This should not be an
allowance for disobedience, but a recognition of
how human works will frequently fail. It is safe
to say that Yeshua really did want His audience,
and us today, to understand what is communicated
by Psalm 51:16-17:
“For You do not delight in sacrifice, otherwise
I would give it; You are not pleased with burnt
offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken
spirit; a broken and a contrite heart, O God,
You will not despise.”
All of us are to be brought to our knees when we
contemplate the perfection and sinlessness of
our Creator,
and our limitations as mortals.
Today’s Messianic movement is quite strong in recognizing that the
mission and ministry of Yeshua are in alignment
with the expectations of Moses and the Prophets.
The Messiah did not come to overthrow the
validity and relevance of the Tanach or Old
Testament. Yet, today’s Messianic movement does
need to improve in its comprehension of the
ethics and morality of Yeshua’s Sermon on
the Mount. Much of what today’s contemporary
Messianic movement classifies as Torah
observance is only concerned with Shabbat,
the appointed times, or dietary laws—and while
surely important—not enough on how the Torah’s
commandments are to mold our character so that
we can be more like the Lord, in our deeds
and thoughts. We are also not
as strong as we should be in understanding how
Yeshua not only fulfills the Law, but also the
Prophets—and how the Prophets themselves
frequently had to call people back to the
righteous requirements of God’s Torah. The
Prophets were very concerned with care for the
destitute and needy, and with the lack of social
justice they witnessed in Ancient Israel.
It will be a very, very long time before the Tanach Scriptures have
completely “passed away.” In the meantime, as we
wait for the eschaton and new Creation, we need
to make sure that we have not just a high view
of the Torah’s commandments—but those which
are especially highlighted by the Lord Himself
in His Sermon on the Mount. Yeshua did not come
to “fulfill and thus abolish” the Law. His
fulfillment of the Law actually goes well
beyond His accomplishing various Messianic
prophecies, and includes how the Torah’s
standard of holiness and righteousness is to be
seen in the good works of redeemed Believers.
How such Believers choose to implement, or not
implement, the Torah’s instructions, will have
some lasting effects in the rewards He gives
them. I think that we should be naturally
motivated to want more of a reward than just
“being” in His Kingdom.
Many more things await us as the Body of Messiah in regard to the
fulfillment of the Torah. The Pentateuch
includes prophetic words about the future that
we have yet to see take place (i.e., Genesis chs.
48-49; Deuteronomy 4:23-40;
30:1-14).
The question “Has the Law been fulfilled?” from
the prophetic angle would be a clear “No.” The
Torah remains relevant as long as the current
Creation remains. More critically to be
answered, though, is the question: “Is the Law
being fulfilled?” Are we seeking to emulate the
example left by our Messiah, Savior, and Teacher
in our own lives? Are we following the Tanach’s
significant principles of piety and holiness?
Yeshua’s mission was one where all righteousness would be fulfilled
(Matthew 3:15). This does not only involve Him
coming into this world as the Son of God
sacrificed for our sins, but how those who would
believe in Him would impact others with the
legacy He entrusted. Does this involve
understanding the expectations of Moses and the
Prophets, and obedience to them? The Apostles
surely thought so. They considered the
Scriptures as they knew them to be important (2
Timothy 3:16). Let us strive to be mature men
and women in the Lord who likewise have value
for all of the Scriptures! May we really learn
to appreciate what He has done for us by being
taught from what He came to uphold, and
practicing good works by the power of the Holy
Spirit. Then, when we do finally see our Lord
face to face in glory, He can indeed call us
“great”!
J.K. McKee (B.A., University of Oklahoma; M.A., Asbury
Theological Seminary) is the editor of TNN Online (www.tnnonline.net)
and is a Messianic apologist. He is author of several books,
including: The New Testament Validates Torah, Torah In the
Balance, Volume I, and When Will the Messiah Return?.
He has also written many articles on the Two Houses of Israel
and Biblical theology, and is presently focusing on Messianic
commentaries on various books of the Bible.
NOTES
[1]
In spite of claims made by some
Messianic Believers who think that
the Gospel of Matthew was originally
written in Hebrew, this paper is
concerned principally with the text
of Matthew 5:17-19 as it exists
in its final, canonical form.
Our attention will be primarily
given to the Greek text that stands
behind our modern English
translations.
The statement most
often provided to support an
original Hebrew Gospel of Matthew
comes from Eusebius’
Ecclesiastical History, where
quoting the early Christian leader
Papias, he says, “Matthew composed
his history in the Hebrew dialect,
and everyone translated it as he was
able” (3.39.16; trans. C.F. Cruse
[Peabody, MA: Hendrickson,
1998],106). There is no agreement
among interpreters of Matthew today
as to what is meant by Papias’
actual statement Hebraidi
dialektō ta logia sunetaxato (Ebraidi
dialektw ta logia sunetaxato).
Donald A. Hagner describes, “Nearly
every element in [the complete]
sentence can be understood in more
than one way” (Word Biblical
Commentary: Matthew 1-13, Vol
33a [Nashville: Thomas Nelson,
1993], xliv).
The various proposals
made about what Matthew composing
Hebraic “oracles” or logia (logia)
means, include: (1) a complete
Gospel in Hebrew, now no longer
extant; (2) incorporation of Hebrew
or Aramaic sources (like Q) or
secondhand notes of the Messiah’s
sayings into a finalized Greek text;
or (3) composition of a complete
Greek Gospel in a Jewish style of
writing.
There is probably
merit in the second and third
options, with the third most often
favored among Matthew commentators.
S. McKnight summarizes, “In all
likelihood our Gospel of Matthew was
composed originally in Greek and in
a Jewish style” (“Matthew, Gospel
of,” in Joel B. Green, Scot
McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall,
eds., Dictionary of Jesus and the
Gospels [Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity, 1992], 528).
For a further
summary, consult the discussions by
Donald Guthrie, New Testament
Introduction (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity, 1990), pp 44-53; D.A.
Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An
Introduction to the New Testament,
second edition (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 2005), pp 140-150;
McKnight, “Matthew, Gospel of,” in
Dictionary of Jesus and the
Gospels, pp 526-527; Hagner, pp
xliii-xlvi. For a Messianic
perspective, consult Tim Hegg,
Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew:
Chapters 1-7 (Tacoma, WA:
TorahResource, 2007), pp 2-7; and
the editor’s entry on the Gospel of
Matthew in
A Survey of
the Apostolic Scriptures for the
Practical Messianic.
[2]
John Nolland, New
International Greek Testament
Commentary: The Gospel of Matthew
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 215.
[3]
W.D. Davies and D.C.
Allison, International Critical
Commentary: Matthew 1-7 (London:
T&T Clark, 1988), pp 481-482.
[4]
H.G. Lidell and R.
Scott, An Intermediate
Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1994), 410.
[5]
Frederick William
Danker, ed., et. al.,
A Greek-English
Lexicon of the New Testament and
Other Early Christian Literature,
third edition (Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 2000), pp 521,
522.
[6]
2 Maccabees 2:19-22;
4 Maccabees 5:33; Philo On Dreams
2.123; Josephus Antiquities of
the Jews 16.35; 20.81.
Cf. Nolland, pp
217-218.
[7]
Leonard Kravitz and
Kerry M. Olitzky, eds. and trans.,
Pirke Avot: A Modern Commentary
on Jewish Ethics (New York: UAHC
Press, 1993), 43.
[8]
BDAG,
828.
[9]
Ibid.
[10]
Joseph H. Thayer,
Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of
the New Testament (Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson, 2003), 518.
[11]
BDAG,
829.
[12]
Marcus Jastrow,
Dictionary of the Targumim, Talmud
Bavli, Talmud Yerushalmi, and
Midrashic Literature (New York:
Judaica Treasury, 2004), 1330.
[13]
D.A. Carson,
“Matthew,” in Frank E. Gaebelein,
ed. et. al., Expositor’s Bible
Commentary (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1984) , 142; cf. Thayer,
517.
For further
discussion, consult Hegg, pp
173-174.
[14]
Hagner, 105.
[15]
Nolland, 218.
[16]
Carson, in EXP,
8:143.
[17]
Cf. David Bivin and
Roy Blizzard, Jr., Understanding
the Difficult Words of Jesus: New
Insights From a Hebraic Perspective
(Shippensburg, PA: Destiny Image,
1994), pp 114-115.
[18]
Hegg, 171.
[19]
“‘Cursed is he who
does not confirm the words of this
law by doing them.’ And all the
people shall say, ‘Amen.’”
[20]
Hagner, 103.
[21]
Leon Morris,
Pillar New Testament Commentary: The
Gospel According to Matthew
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 108.
[22]
Ibid.
[23]
John R.W. Stott,
The Message of the Sermon on the
Mount (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity, 1978), 71.
Do note that Stott,
holding to the traditional Reformed
distinction between the so-called
ceremonial law and moral law,
further argues that at the cross,
the Levitical priesthood and various
outward ordinances of the Torah
ended.
[24]
Carson, in EXP,
8:144.
[25]
Walter C. Kaiser,
Toward Old Testament Ethics
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983),
311.
[26]
Davies and Allison,
486.
[27]
Kenneth L. Barker,
ed., et. al., NIV Study Bible
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002),
1475.
[28]
D.J. Moo, “Law,” in
Dictionary of Jesus and the
Gospels, pp 457, 459.
[29]
Hagner, 106.
[30]
R.T. France, New
International Commentary on the New
Testament: The Gospel of Matthew
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), pp
182-183.
[31]
Anthony J. Saldarini,
“Matthew,” in James D.G. Dunn and
John W. Rogerson, eds., Eerdmans
Commentary on the Bible (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 1015.
[32]
John Goldingay,
Old Testament Theology: Israel’s
Gospel (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity, 2003), 801.
[33]
Michael J. Wilkins,
The NIV Application Commentary:
Matthew (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 2004), 230.
[34]
Nolland, pp 218-219.
[35]
David H. Stern,
Jewish New Testament Commentary
(Clarksville, MD: Jewish New
Testament Publications, 1995), 25.
[36]
Matthew 1:22; 2:15,
17, 23; 4:14; 8:17; 12:17; 13:35;
21:4; 26:54, 56; 27:9.
[37]
Davies and Allison,
484.
[38]
Hagner, 105.
[39]
Hegg, 173.
[40]
Ibid.
[41]
Davies and Allison,
487.
[42]
Walter C. Kaiser,
“The Law as God’s Guidance for the
Promotion of Holiness,” in Wayne G.
Strickland, ed., Five Views on
Law and Gospel (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1996), 198.
Cf. Isaiah 1:11-18;
Jeremiah 7:21-24; Hosea 6:6; Amos
5:21-24; 7:21-23; Micah 6:6-8.
[43]
M. Eugene Boring,
“The Gospel of Matthew,” in Leander
E. Keck, ed. et. al., New
Interpreter’s Bible (Nashville:
Abingdon, 1995), 8:186-187.
[44]
France, 183.
[45]
Deuteronomy 6:5;
Leviticus 19:18; cf. Matthew 19:19;
22:39; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27;
Romans 13:9; Galatians 5:14; James
2:8.
[46]
Stott, 72.
[47]
Nolland, 215.
[48]
Cf. Ludwig Koehler
and Walter Baumgartner, eds., The
Hebrew & Aramaic Lexicon of the Old
Testament, 2 vols. (Leiden, the
Netherlands: Brill, 2001), 1:63-64.
[49]
Carson, in EXP,
8:145.
[50]
Ibid., 146.
[51]
BDAG,
197.
[52]
Davies and Allison,
494.
[53]
Stott, 73.
[54]
Nolland, 221.
[55]
Stern, Jewish New
Testament Commentary, 27.
[56]
The Babylonian
Talmud: A Translation and
Commentary.
MS Windows XP.
Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2005.
CD-ROM.
[57]
Craig S. Keener,
IVP New Testament Commentary Series:
Matthew (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity, 1997), 111.
[58]
LS,
428.
[59]
Nolland, 220.
[60]
Louis A. Barbieri,
Jr., “Matthew,” in John F. Walvoord
and Roy B. Zuck, eds., The Bible
Knowledge Commentary: New Testament
(Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983),
30.
[61]
Boring, in NIB,
8:187.
[62]
Hagner, 106.
[63]
Simply compare how
this is rendered in Christian and
Jewish Bible versions, with one
confirming the sacrifice of Yeshua,
and another denying it:
“For dogs have
surrounded me; A band of evildoers
has encompassed me; They pierced my
hands and my feet” (NASU).
“Dogs surround me; a
pack of evil ones closes in on me,
like lions they maul my hands
and feet” (NJPS).
These differences are
noted by David H. Stern, trans.,
Complete Jewish Bible
(Clarksville, MD: Jewish New
Testament Publications, 1998), 809,
and then explained Ibid., xxx. Also
consult the editor’s statements on
Psalm 22:17 in his article
“Answering the ‘Frequently Avoided
Questions’ About the Messiahship of
Yeshua.”
[64]
BDAG,
314.
[65]
Wilkins, 230.
[66]
Ibid.; Keener, pp
111-112; Nolland, 222.
[67]
Jacob
Neusner, trans., The Mishnah: A
New Translation (New Haven and
London: Yale University Press,
1988), 675.
[68]
Wilkins, 230.
[69]
Keener, pp 111-112.
[70]
LS,
482.
[71]
Carson, in EXP,
8:146.
[72]
John Wesley,
Explanatory Notes Upon the New
Testament, reprint
(Peterborough, UK: Epworth Press,
2000), 30.
[73]
For a summary of this
position, consult especially Walter
C. Kaiser, “The Law as God’s
Guidance for the Promotion of
Holiness,” in Five Views on Law
and Gospel, pp 177-199.
[74]
Nolland, 223.
[75]
Keener, 110.
[76]
Stott, 74.
[77]
Wilkins, 235.
[78]
Consult the editor’s
book
Torah In the
Balance, Volume II
(forthcoming) for a discussion of
these, and other areas.
[79]
France, 186 fn#25.
[80]
For a further
discussion, consult the editor’s
article “Addressing
the Frequently Avoided Issues that
Messianics Encounter in the Torah.”
[81]
BDAG,
998.
[82]
Ben Witherington III,
Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on
Paul’s Letter to the Galatians
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 424.
[83]
Boring, in NIB,
8:196.
[84]
France, pp 179-180.
[85]
Consult the editor’s
commentary
Hebrews for
the Practical Messianic.
[86]
Consult the editor’s
article “The
Message of Galatians,”
and his commentary
Galatians for
the Practical Messianic.
[87]
Consult the editor’s
article “Have
We Been ‘Made Dead’ to the Truths of
God’s Word?”
[88]
Consult the editor’s article “Is
Messiah the Termination of the
Torah?”
[89]
Consult the editor’s
articles “To
Eat or Not to Eat?”
and “How
Are We to Properly Keep Kosher?”
[90]
Stott, 72.
|