S
Jesus did many things in His earthly ministry. But one thing He did not do was set aside the moral law of God. The Pharisees and scribes had set aside God’s law (in favor of their own traditions), thereby “emptying” the law of any value (Matthew 15:3–6). And Jesus rebuked them for it (Matthew 15:7–9). It is ironic that some Christians think that Jesus came to abolish (abrogate, set aside, or do away with) the law, when Jesus specifically said that He did not come to abolish the law. This statement is given in reference to God’s law, in the beatitudes (Matthew 5:1-8:29), where Christ described the standards for appropriate behavior and attitude of the heart (i.e. morality). In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says, “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.”
Perhaps some people are inclined to say, “Well, if Jesus fulfilled the law, then we don’t have to obey it anymore.” But this misses the meaning of the word “fulfill.” The Greek word translated “fulfill” in this verse is “pleroo.” This word means “to confirm in full measure”, or to “establish” or “re-establish.” It has the sense of filling up a cup: in this case, the cup of God’s law that had been “emptied” by the Pharisees and scribes. Jesus was undoing what the Pharisees and scribes were doing. They were abrogating the law of God; Jesus came to re-establish it.
Even without consulting a Greek lexicon, it should be very obvious that the word “fulfill” as it is used in Matthew 5:17 cannot possibly mean “abolish”, or anything that implies a setting-aside of the law of God. For if it did then Jesus would be contradicting Himself. If “fulfill” means “abolish” then Jesus is essentially saying, “I did not come to abolish but to abolish”—which would make no logical sense.
In fact, it should be clear that “fulfill” must in some sense be the opposite of “abolish” since Jesus contrasts one with the other. For example, fill in the following sentence: “I did not come to make peace, but rather to make _____.” A good answer would be “war” or some similar term of division since such a term contrasts with peace. A bad answer would be “pancakes”, because that doesn’t contrast with peace. Even though that answer would be grammatically possible, it wouldn’t fit the context. Of course the worst possible answer would be “peace”, because then the sentence would be self-contradictory. Therefore, when Jesus says that He “did not come to abolish [the law] but to fulfill,” it is clear that in fulfilling the law He is doing something that sharply contrasts with abolishing the law. Christ came to establish the law in full measure. In the beatitudes, Christ gives a fuller explanation of the moral law, showing that it goes beyond the shallow, minimalistic, and externalized view of the Pharisees.
In the next verse (Matthew 5:18) Jesus goes on to say, “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.” He is emphasizing His previous statement by pointing out the permanence of the moral law of God. Not even the smallest letter (In Hebrew this is a “jot”) or even a fraction of a letter (a “stroke” or “tittle”) of the law of God will pass away until heaven and earth do! In putting it this way, Jesus is indicating that God’s law is more permanent than the universe! The Greek phrase “until all is accomplished” literally means “until all has come to pass.” It’s another way of emphasizing that God’s law will outlast human history.
Jesus gives us the “bottom line” in the next verse. Having already indicated that He did not come to annul (set-aside) the law of God, that the law of God will outlast heaven and earth, Christ goes on to say that there are consequences for setting aside one of God’s standing laws. In Matthew 5:19 Jesus states, “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.” As we have seen previously, God Himself may add to or subtract from His law. And many of the Old Testament ceremonial laws are examples of something that God Himself tells us are not binding on believers in the New Testament. The Law-Giver may do this. But we dare not set aside a law of God, lest we be considered very “small” in the kingdom of heaven.
This verse should motivate us to be very careful if we tell others that they don’t need to obey a particular biblical law. We had better be certain it’s a law that God Himself has set aside in later revelation. The result of setting aside a law of God (one that God Himself has not set aside) and teaching others to do the same is an eternal one; being considered “least” in the kingdom of heaven. You might think that the person who teaches others to keep all the standing laws of God would then be considered “great” in the kingdom of heaven. But that’s not quite what God’s Word teaches. Jesus tells us that those who teach and keep them shall be considered great. It’s easy enough to teach God’s laws, but we can all do better when it comes to obedience.
God’s Law: Established in Christ | Jason Lisle's Blog
Perhaps some people are inclined to say, “Well, if Jesus fulfilled the law, then we don’t have to obey it anymore.” But this misses the meaning of the word “fulfill.” The Greek word translated “fulfill” in this verse is “pleroo.” This word means “to confirm in full measure”, or to “establish” or “re-establish.” It has the sense of filling up a cup: in this case, the cup of God’s law that had been “emptied” by the Pharisees and scribes. Jesus was undoing what the Pharisees and scribes were doing. They were abrogating the law of God; Jesus came to re-establish it.
Even without consulting a Greek lexicon, it should be very obvious that the word “fulfill” as it is used in Matthew 5:17 cannot possibly mean “abolish”, or anything that implies a setting-aside of the law of God. For if it did then Jesus would be contradicting Himself. If “fulfill” means “abolish” then Jesus is essentially saying, “I did not come to abolish but to abolish”—which would make no logical sense.
In fact, it should be clear that “fulfill” must in some sense be the opposite of “abolish” since Jesus contrasts one with the other. For example, fill in the following sentence: “I did not come to make peace, but rather to make _____.” A good answer would be “war” or some similar term of division since such a term contrasts with peace. A bad answer would be “pancakes”, because that doesn’t contrast with peace. Even though that answer would be grammatically possible, it wouldn’t fit the context. Of course the worst possible answer would be “peace”, because then the sentence would be self-contradictory. Therefore, when Jesus says that He “did not come to abolish [the law] but to fulfill,” it is clear that in fulfilling the law He is doing something that sharply contrasts with abolishing the law. Christ came to establish the law in full measure. In the beatitudes, Christ gives a fuller explanation of the moral law, showing that it goes beyond the shallow, minimalistic, and externalized view of the Pharisees.
In the next verse (Matthew 5:18) Jesus goes on to say, “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.” He is emphasizing His previous statement by pointing out the permanence of the moral law of God. Not even the smallest letter (In Hebrew this is a “jot”) or even a fraction of a letter (a “stroke” or “tittle”) of the law of God will pass away until heaven and earth do! In putting it this way, Jesus is indicating that God’s law is more permanent than the universe! The Greek phrase “until all is accomplished” literally means “until all has come to pass.” It’s another way of emphasizing that God’s law will outlast human history.
Jesus gives us the “bottom line” in the next verse. Having already indicated that He did not come to annul (set-aside) the law of God, that the law of God will outlast heaven and earth, Christ goes on to say that there are consequences for setting aside one of God’s standing laws. In Matthew 5:19 Jesus states, “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.” As we have seen previously, God Himself may add to or subtract from His law. And many of the Old Testament ceremonial laws are examples of something that God Himself tells us are not binding on believers in the New Testament. The Law-Giver may do this. But we dare not set aside a law of God, lest we be considered very “small” in the kingdom of heaven.
This verse should motivate us to be very careful if we tell others that they don’t need to obey a particular biblical law. We had better be certain it’s a law that God Himself has set aside in later revelation. The result of setting aside a law of God (one that God Himself has not set aside) and teaching others to do the same is an eternal one; being considered “least” in the kingdom of heaven. You might think that the person who teaches others to keep all the standing laws of God would then be considered “great” in the kingdom of heaven. But that’s not quite what God’s Word teaches. Jesus tells us that those who teach and keep them shall be considered great. It’s easy enough to teach God’s laws, but we can all do better when it comes to obedience.
God’s Law: Established in Christ | Jason Lisle's Blog
