Answer Jesus said, “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. For truly I tell you, 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” (Matthew 5:17–18). This important statement of our Lord gives us insight into His mission and the character of God’s Word.Jesus’ declaration that He came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets, not to abolish them, obviously contains two statements in one. There is something Jesus did and something He did not do. At the same time, Jesus emphasized the eternal nature of the Word of God. Jesus goes out of His way to promote the authority of the Law of God. He did not come to abolish the Law, regardless of what the Pharisees accused Him of. In fact, Jesus continues His statement with a commendation for those who teach the Law accurately and hold it in reverence: “Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly 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” (Matthew 5:19). Note the qualities that Jesus attributes to the Word of God, referenced as “the Law and the Prophets”: 1) The Word is everlasting; it will outlast the natural world. 2) The Word was written with intent; it was meant to be fulfilled. 3) The Word possesses plenary authority; even the smallest letter of it is established. 4) The Word is faithful and trustworthy; “everything” it says will be accomplished. No one hearing Jesus’ words in the Sermon on the Mount could doubt His commitment to the Scriptures. Consider what Jesus did not do in His ministry. In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says that He did not come to abolish the Law and the Prophets. In other words, Jesus’ purpose was not to abrogate the Word, dissolve it, or render it invalid. The Prophets will be fulfilled; the Law will continue to accomplish the purpose for which it was given (see Isaiah 55:10–11). Next, consider what Jesus did do. Jesus says that He came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets. In other words, Jesus’ purpose was to establish the Word, to embody it, and to fully accomplish all that was written. “Christ is the culmination of the law” (Romans 10:4). The predictions of the Prophets concerning the Messiah would be realized in Jesus; the holy standard of the Law would be perfectly upheld by Christ, the strict requirements personally obeyed, and the ceremonial observances finally and fully satisfied. Jesus Christ fulfilled the Prophets in that, in His first coming alone, He fulfilled hundreds of prophecies concerning Himself (e.g., Matthew 1:22; 13:35; John 19:36; Luke 24:44). Jesus Christ fulfilled the Law in at least two ways: as a teacher and as a doer. He taught people to obey the Law (Matthew 22:35–40; Mark 1:44), and He obeyed the Law Himself (John 8:46; 1 Peter 2:22). In living a perfect life, Jesus fulfilled the moral laws; in His sacrificial death, Jesus fulfilled the ceremonial laws. Christ came not to destroy the old religious system but to build upon it; He came to finish the Old Covenant and establish the New. Jesus came not to destroy the Law and the Prophets but to fulfill them. In fact, the ceremonies, sacrifices, and other elements of the Old Covenant were “only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves” (Hebrews 10:1). The tabernacle and temple were “holy places made with hands,” but they were never meant to be permanent; they were but “copies of the true things” (Hebrews 9:24, ESV). The Law had a built-in expiration date, being filled as it was with “external regulations applying until the time of the new order” (Hebrews 9:10). In His fulfillment of the Law and Prophets, Jesus obtained our eternal salvation. No more were priests required to offer sacrifices and enter the holy place (Hebrews 10:8–14). Jesus has done that for us, once and for all. By grace through faith, we are made right with God: “He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross” (Colossians 2:14).There are some who argue that, since Jesus did not “abolish” the Law, then the Law is still in effect—and still binding on New Testament Christians. But Paul is clear that the believer in Christ is no longer under the Law: “We were held in custody under the Law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the Law became our guardian to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian” (Galatians 3:23–25, BSB). We are not under the Mosaic Law but under “the law of Christ” (see Galatians 6:2). If the Law is still binding on us today, then it has not yet accomplished its purpose—it has not yet been fulfilled. If the Law, as a legal system, is still binding on us today, then Jesus was wrong in claiming to fulfill it and His sacrifice on the cross was insufficient to save. Thank God, Jesus fulfilled the whole Law and now grants us His righteousness as a free gift. “Know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified” (Galatians 2:16).
The law that God gave to Moses for the people Israel was a central part of their existence. It was the perfect standard by which they were to conduct their lives. Though the law was perfect, it revealed how imperfect each individual was. The law gave people the knowledge of sin but not the solution.
Scripture says the following about the relationship of Jesus to the Old Testament law. Jesus Was Born Under Law Jesus was born under the Law of Moses.
He Was Sinless Under The Law Jesus was also sinless under the law
Jesus Fulfilled The Law Jesus, as the promised Messiah, came and fulfilled the Law of Moses. He testified.
Jesus Kept The Law Jesus is the only person who has ever kept the law perfectly. He did everything the law required, never once breaking any of its commandments. Because He was sinless, Jesus was able to meet the requirements of the law to be the perfect sacrifice. His death redeemed humanity from the curse of the law.
The Curse Of The Law Was Removed By Jesus' Death The curse that the law had over humanity was now removed. The death of Christ meant that those who were previously slaves under the law could become the children of God and heirs to His promises.
Christ has taken away the bondage of the law for the believer and given freedom in place of slavery. Jesus Taught The Law Jesus faithfully taught the law. He rejected the unbiblical traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees.
There Is The New Law Of Christ Those who have become Christians are now under the law of Christ.
Paul wrote.
Summary Jesus is the only person who has ever lived who has perfectly kept God's law. Because He fulfilled the law, Jesus was able to become the perfect sacrifice for sin. Those who put their faith in Him are freed from the bondage of the law and have become God's children. Matthew 5:17 is the 17th verse of the fifth chapter of the Gospel of Matthew in the New Testament and is part of the Sermon on the Mount. One of the most debated verses in the gospel, this verse begins a new section on Jesus and the Torah,[1] where Jesus discusses the Law and the Prophets.
← 5:16 5:18 → Ecclesia et Synagoga, a medieval depiction comparing Jewish and Christian law on the façade of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. BookGospel of MatthewChristian Bible partNew TestamentThe original Koine Greek, according to Westcott and Hort, reads: μη νομισητε οτι ηλθον καταλυσαι τον νομον η τους προφητας ουκ ηλθον καταλυσαι αλλα πληρωσαιIn the King James Version of the Bible the text reads: Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.The World English Bible translates the passage as: "Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn’t come to destroy, but to fulfill."For a collection of other versions see BibleGateway Matthew 5:17 This verse is central to the debate over the relationship between the New Testament and the Old Testament first begun by Marcion of Sinope. There are several parts of the New Testament where Jesus can be read as rejecting some tenets of Mosaic law. Issues include the traditional understanding of the Sabbath in Matthew 12:8, divorce laws in Matthew 5:31, and dietary prohibitions in Matthew 15:11. The antinomian viewpoint holds that, because Jesus accomplished all that was required by the law, thus fulfilling it, he made it unnecessary for anyone to do anything further. Proponents of this view believe this view was described by the Apostles in Acts of the Apostles, and that the Jewish Christians overlooked such teaching as they continued to worship in Herod's Temple as prescribed by the Mosaic Law, even after the resurrection. According to this view, anyone accepting his gift of salvation would not only avoid consequences of failing to live up to the law, but is no longer expected to do any works of the law for any spiritual reason (See also Hyperdispensationalism).[2][3] The opposite of antinomianism is the idea that the entire Torah Law is still entirely applicable to Christians - not for salvation, but rather for simple obedience. This interpretation stems primarily from the New Testament affirmation that Jesus Christ was sinless in every way (Hebrews 4:15), sin is defined by the Torah (1 John 3:4), and that Jesus' followers, both Jew and Gentile, are admonished to imitate Jesus in every way (1 John 2:6). This view affirms the six points of St. Augustine listed below, but differs from other traditional views by affirming obedience to specific commands of the Law such as dietary laws; laws to which other views teach obedience is no longer intended by God. Proponents of this view see Matthew 23:1–3 and 23:23 as evidence that Jesus did not negate any aspects of the Biblical Torah Law for his followers. Furthermore, they see it as a contradiction of Jesus' sinlessness (according to His own words, Matthew 5:19) for Him to have taught disobedience to any Torah command, no matter how small. For references for this view, see Christian views on the old covenant. Early ChristiansThis issue was a central one to the Jewish Christians, that the author of Matthew is widely believed to have been a part of, as the Jewish Christians would have accused the Pauline Christians of abandoning Jewish doctrine, for example the Council of Jerusalem and Acts of the Apostles 21:21: "They have been told about you that you teach all the Jews living among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, and that you tell them not to circumcise their children or observe the customs." NRSVSome scholars also believe that antinomianism, the belief that all was allowed because there were no laws, was believed by a faction in the early Christian community. In this verse the Gospel of Matthew directly counters these views by insisting the old laws such as the Ten Commandments are still valid. France notes that "law and prophets" was a common expression for the entirety of what Christians today call the Old Testament, though it more correctly refers to the Mosaic Law and Neviim, see Biblical Canon.[4] The main controversy over this verse is over the word "fulfill." What exactly does fulfilling the laws entail? A wide number of reading of the word pleroo, fulfil, have been advanced. Among them are: establish, confirm, validate, complete, bring into actuality by doing, set forth in their true meaning, accomplish, and obey. These varying definitions and the textual uncertainty over the status of the law have led to a number of understandings of the relationship between Mosaic law and the New Testament. In the early church there were a number of factions that felt the coming of Jesus had brought about a rejection of the Old Testament, these included the followers of Simon Magus, Marcionism, Gnosticism, Montanism, Manichaeism, and others. The Ante-Nicene Fathers in the early church rejected these views and spent considerable time rebutting them. For example, Irenaeus rejected Marcion and praised the Apostles in his Against Heresies 3.12.12:[5] "...being brought over to the doctrine of Simon Magus, they have apostatized in their opinions from Him who is God, and imagined that they have themselves discovered more than the apostles, by finding out another god; and [maintained] that the apostles preached the Gospel still somewhat under the influence of Jewish opinions, but that they themselves are purer [in doctrine], and more intelligent, than the apostles."St AugustineAnother important writer who rejected any break between Jesus and Moses was St. Augustine who outlines his view in his Reply to Faustus, a Manichaeist. Augustine outlined six different ways in which Jesus fulfilled the law:
Other writersThe most important of these arguments was the sixth, that Jesus expanded the law but did not replace it. A number of others used analogy to explain this notion. Chrysostom used the analogy of a race saying that Jesus had added extra distance for the Christians to run, but the beginning remained the same.[6] Theophylact of Bulgaria used the image of an artist colouring in an outline, and St. Thomas Aquinas saw it as how a tree still contains the seed. This view became the accepted Roman Catholic position, but was challenged in the Protestant reformation. Leading Protestants such as Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Huldrych Zwingli rejected the idea Jesus had added to the Law. Rather they argued that Jesus only illustrated the true Law that had always existed, but had been badly understood by the Pharisees and other Jewish leaders. The Anabaptists took the opposite view and felt the Jesus had greatly reformed the Law and felt that Old Testament precepts could only be justified if they had been reaffirmed by Jesus. E. P. Sanders in Jesus and Judaism, published in 1985, argued that Jesus was a Pharisee, as he could find no substantial points of opposition. He maintained that Jesus himself did not transgress any part of the Mosaic law, did not oppose or reject the law, and that the disciples continued to keep it, as is shown by their continued worship in Herod's Temple (e.g. Acts 3:1; 21:23–26). Sanders also argued that Jesus' sayings did not entirely determine early Christian behaviour and attitude, as is shown by Paul's discussion of divorce (1 Corinthians 7:10–16), where he quotes Jesus' sayings ("not I but the Lord") and then gives his own independent ("I and not the Lord") rules. (See also Great Apostasy, Cafeteria Christianity). Glossa Ordinaria: Having now exhorted His hearers to undergo all things for righteousness’ sake, and also not to hide what they should receive, but to learn more for others’ sake, that they may teach others, He now goes on to tell them what they should teach, as though He had been asked, ‘What is this which you would not have hid, and for which you would have all things endured? Are you about to speak any thing beyond what is written in the Law and the Prophets;’ hence it is He says, Think not that I am come to subvert the Law or the Prophets.[7] Pseudo-Chrysostom: And that for two reasons. First, that by these words He might admonish His disciples, that as He fulfilled the Law, so they should strive to fulfil it. Secondly, because the Jews would falsely accuse them as subverting the Law, therefore he answers the calumny beforehand, but in such a manner as that He should not be thought to come simply to preach the Law as the Prophets had done.[7] Saint Remigius: He here asserts two things; He denies that He was come to subvert the Law, and affirms that He was come to fulfil it.[7] Augustine: In this last sentence again there is a double sense; to fulfil the Law, either by adding something which it had not, or by doing what it commands.[7] Chrysostom: Christ then fulfilled the Prophets by accomplishing what was therein foretold concerning Himself—and the Law, first, by transgressing none of its precepts; secondly, by justifying by faith, which the Law could not do by the letter.[7] Augustine: And lastly, because even for them who were under grace, it was hard in this mortal life to fulfil that of the Law, Thou shalt not lust, He being made a Priest by the sacrifice of His flesh, obtained for us this indulgence, even in this fulfilling the Law, that where through our infirmity we could not, we should be strengthened through His perfection, of whom as our head we all are members. For so I think must be taken these words, to fulfil the Law, by adding to it, that is, such things as either contribute to the explanation of the old glosses, or to enable to keep them. For the Lord has showed us that even a wicked motion of the thoughts to the wrong of a brother is to be accounted a kind of murder. The Lord also teaches us, that it is better to keep near to the truth without swearing, than with a true oath to come near to blasphemy.[7]
|
What is Jesus saying about the law?
Postagens relacionadas
direito autoral © 2024 cemle Inc.
