Matthew 5:17-19 -- A Critical Examination

Matthew 5:17-19 – A Critical Examination

Matthew 5:17-19 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. ¹⁸For 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. ¹⁹Whosoever 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.

There are several issues that need to be examined regarding this passage of scripture.

1. How we are to understand “fulfil” and “fulfilled” in verses 17 and 18.

2. What “these” commandments are.

3. The implications of what happens when heaven and earth pass.

4. What Jesus meant by “till all be fulfilled” and not necessarily what we believe it means.

5. What is meant by “law” in context. Is it the legalities of the law, or more, such as the rest of the old testament, including prophesies.

Fulfil

Fulfil: Gr. Pleroo To make replete, i.e. (Lit.) to cram (a net), level up (a hollow), or (fig.) to furnish (or imbue, diffuse, influence), satisfy, execute (an office), finish (a period or task), verify (or coincide with a prediction), etc.: accomplish, x after, (be) complete, end, expire, fill (up), fulfil, (be, make) full (come), fully preach, perfect, supply. (fr. Strongs Concordance)

Other passages using Pleroo

Matthew 3:15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him. [satisfy, execute]

Philippians 2:2 Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. [satisfy, furnish, supply]

Colossians 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; [satisfy, execute, fully preach, supply]

Colossians 4:17 And say to Archippus, Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in the Lord, that thou fulfil it. [accomplish; fully preach]

II Thessalonians 1:11 Wherefore also we pray always for you, that our God would count you worthy of this calling, and fulfil all the good pleasure of his goodness, and the work of faith with power: [supply]

As one can see, the contextual use of the word does not support the “fill to the full” interpretation put forth by those who claim it is the law being filled up to the full, instead of the fulfillment of prophesies, uttered by the prophets found in the law and the prophets and in the writings (ex. Psalms). To conclude it is the law itself being “full-filled” contradicts other claims regarding the law being “perfect” and “eternal” as well as ignoring the contrast statement in regards to “destroy” and also refutes the context concerning the usage of the word used in the past tense in verse 18 (till all be fulfilled) as though this doesn’t mean all events that were yet to occur.

Destroy: fr. Strongs # 2647 kataluo: to loosen down (disintegrate), i.e. (by impl.) to demolish (lit. or fig.); spec. [comp. 2646 dissolution] to halt for the night: - destroy, dissolve, be guest, lodge, come to naught, overthrow, throw down.

Are laws enunciated, codified, listed, given, in the prophets? No. Therefore you cannot do away with law where there is no law.

Are there prophesies in what is commonly termed, “the law”? Yes.

Is “law” ever used in context to mean more than the legalities of the law, such as the entirety of the old testament? Yes.

Those who hold to the first position insist that, seeing as the prophets are not mentioned again in verse 18, he is not talking about what might be in the prophets (prophesies); the context of verse 17 is to be ignored. No explanation is ever given for ignoring the context. The conclusion is purely eisegetical; not only through ignoring the immediate context, but all other sources commonly used in exegetical practice.

They also quote in support of this view Isaiah 42:21:

The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.

No doubt Jesus magnified the law, putting forth the intent of the law and the Spirit of the law, but then, when was the law dishonorable? Prior to this magnification. And could this magnification of the law be a case of bringing out the spirit of the law, where the letter is no longer applicable? In other words, the intent, and not the action that follows intent is what is important when being judged by God. It is also of interest to note the context of Isaiah 42 in that the people are described as being blind and deaf to what God declares.

Luke 16:16-17 also appears to support the view of filling the law to the full:

The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

Like anything else, the context needs to be carefully examined.

Can the legality of the law “fail”? That is to say, does it have the potential to fail? Also, do prophesies have the potential to fail, prophesies found in the law?

1 Corinthians 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

Paul is making a contrast statement. He is declaring charity (love) can never fail. These other things that are perceived as not being able to fail or vanish away would go before love could fail or vanish away. It is his way of saying love and these things will endure, especially love. Or does the reader claim now that prophesies will fail, people will stop talking, and knowledge can vanish?

If however we attempt to claim that this is speaking of the legalities of the law, some problems arise. If it is only discussing the legalities of the law, then the first part of the sentence would mean that since John, the law is no longer extant. Just like elsewhere, the law can mean much more than the legalities of the law; it can be referring to the entirety of the old testament. Seeing as the passage starts off citing the law and the prophets, that is what is being discussed in context; not the legalities of the law. To claim this validates Mt. 5:17-19 is the same as saying A proves B and B proves A. It does not stand to critical thinking.

Back to Mt. 5:

What happens then when heaven and earth pass away? The law passes away? This goes contrary to the theology of those that uphold the law in this context, for the law is seen as “eternal” and therefore could not pass away. But if one insists on the interpretation that it is the law itself that is being discussed in this passage, there is no other conclusion. When heaven and earth pass away, replaced by the new heavens and earth, the law lapses. To use the argument of those that hold to the letter of the law for Christians, it would be alright then to murder and covet what others have or their positions in the kingdom of God.

It is impossible to conclude that this “fulfilled” has to do with filling the law to the full. It would be like saying, “As soon as the law is filled to the full, it ends; it goes the way of the Dodo. When it is filled up, it gets emptied out. It is “destroyed”.

Even if the one who holds to view #1 agrees that the “fulfilled” is at that point referring to prophesies, it still does not work. This is like saying, as soon as everything is fulfilled prophetically, heaven and earth pass away as well as the legalities of the law. It would be all right for someone to rebel even as Satan rebelled, and there would be no response to the act. It would be perfectly all right to rebel against God at that time.

Jesus and Law

We also must determine whether the ten commandments are what Jesus refers to when he says “the law” or much more. In other words, when Jesus uses the term “law”, what is the context we find Jesus using the law.

By examining those scriptures in the gospels, we should be able to determine what Jesus means by the context where he addresses “the law.”

Matthew 22:35-40 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

In this example, Jesus affirms these commandments are in the law. Seeing as these two are the greatest, any other commandments must be viewed as lesser in importance. Also, these commandments are outside the 10, so we could conclude here that when Jesus refers to “the law”, he includes commandments outside the 10. But let us not be hasty. Let us examine more examples.

Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

From here, we have a reinforcement that commandments in “the law” include those outside the ten commandments, and includes the command to tithe and includes judgment, mercy, and faith as being commands in “the law.”

John 7:23 If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?

In this passage, Jesus brings out that he claims circumcision is in the law; it is a commandment in the law.

What then can we conclude regarding the passage in question if the passage is referring to the legalities of the law instead of prophesies in the law and prophets? We would be forced to conclude that the entirety of the law remains inviolate, including such things as circumcision, sacrifices — all 613 points of law found in the old covenant. To Jesus Christ, the law is a unified whole, and cannot be chopped up into artificial categories of moral, ceremonial, sacrificial, etc. which divisions are man-made and designed to get around the fact all the legalities of the law stand or fall together, for even as James points out:

James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

I must also point out that here in James chapter two, he is not validating law-keeping for Christians, but rather is using the O.T. law as an example to show how the law of Liberty; the Law of Christ applies in regard to love and partiality. If you fail to have love for even one person, you are guilty of trespassing this law of love.

Matthew 19:16-19 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

In this example, where this man asks of Jesus what he must do for eternal life, Jesus tells him he must keep the commandments. When asked which, Jesus lists several of the ten commandments, and includes “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” This last command is not a part of the ten commandments, but it is part of what Jesus called the greatest commandments.

We can conclude that when Jesus refers to “the law” he is referencing much more than the ten commandments, which commandments included circumcision, tithing and stoning one found guilty of adultery. In the N.T. scriptures, written by the apostles and Luke, the law is treated in this fashion also; the ten commandments, the greatest laws of love; all the ordinances, sacrifices— everything commanded in the law from circumcision to sacrifices. Paul even includes in his dealings with the law, not muzzling the ox that treads out the grain, applying it to those who preach the gospel, claiming it isn’t about oxen (the letter of the law) but rather to them.

We must also examine how Jesus used the terminology concerning “the law and the prophets” and any variation on this theme.

Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

This passage tends to lend weight to the claim that it is the prophesies concerning Jesus that are to be fulfilled prophetically, and not a case of filling the law to the full, seeing as Jesus references this in the context of “these are the words which I spake to you” and the narrative in Matthew 5 -7 are those things he spoke to them, his disciples.

It must also be noted that Jesus declares, “that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.”

Notice he says “all things”.

The argument put forth by those who insist on the law being what is fulfilled claim that Jesus did not fulfill “all things” prophetically, therefore they reject the interpretation of “fulfilled” being prophesies. But here we have Jesus saying all things were to be fulfilled by him prophetically, found in the law and prophets and psalms. So Jesus’ understanding of “all things” differs from the “all things” determined by the pro-law crowd. If therefore Jesus declares he fulfilled “all things” and others claim he did not, who are we to believe? Jesus. He fulfilled “all things” regarding the opening of salvation to mankind. The reconciliation of mankind with God is the main theme of all Scripture. Jesus accomplished what he came to do. The way to salvation is now open to those who believe; have faith in Him. Not faith in Him and faith in the law. The law was what people were kept under until this redemptive work was done.

But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. — Galatians 3:23-25

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. —Romans 10:4

I myself used to use the argument that one did not abandon that which he learned from the schoolmaster. But this is not talking about a teacher. This is talking about a paidagogos; one who accompanies the child around, including when the child goes to teachers, and was permitted to even punish the child should he misbehave. When the child came of age (in this analogy, becomes a Christian) the paidagogos is dismissed. His services are no longer required. The person is now mature — in Christ. The Holy Spirit becomes the person’s guide now.

Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished. — Luke 18:31

After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst. — John 19:28

When we come back to the concept of Jesus upholding the legalities of the law down to jots and tittles, we must look at this:

They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. — John 8:4-7

Jesus does not dispute that stoning is in the law. But which is more important to him? Stoning the woman in accordance with the command in the law, or extending mercy, which Jesus said was also of the law?

In any event, the law is quite specific in this case. The law required those who are caught in adultery to be stoned to death, and for good reason.

And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. — Leviticus 20:10

If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel. — Deuteronomy 22:22

To neglect this commandment was to invite further disaster on Israel. The command was absolute; it was something that was to be done and not neglected. The law did not allow for mercy in this instance. Mercy would result in others being emboldened to commit the same sin or worse, thereby causing Israel to slide even further into sin.

Those that hold to the law (in the letter) overlook this example. What needs to be pointed out is that Jesus did not come at that time to condemn, but to save. If Jesus had come to uphold the legalities of the law, then Jesus would have done so, and condemned to death the very ones he was trying to save. Ultimately, who wants to see mankind condemned? The devil. Those that hold to the letter of the law unwittingly are siding with condemnation and the devil, and not Christ.

Now let’s re-examine Matthew 5: 17-18 in this light:

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.

As we have examined so far, Jesus did come to fulfil the law and the prophets prophetically concerning Him in regards to the work begun at the creation of man concerning man. There are yet some other things to be fulfilled prophetically escatalogically, culminating with the new heaven and earth. This does not conflict with the passage above, but actually agrees with it when one sees that two events are discussed above, and not one.

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. — Revelation 21:1

Those things in the law and the prophets will all come to pass; nothing shall be left undone. When all is done, all is fulfilled.

When Jesus states in verse 17 that he came to fulfil, he does not declare in that sentence and context that he came the first time to fulfil everything that culminates in the heaven and earth passing, but rather to fulfill everything he came to fulfill at that time. In due time, all will be fulfilled; then passes earth and heaven, instead of when He came the first time. He makes the distinction, and legalists today blur the distinction.

Mt. 5:19 and “these” commandments.

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.

One would assume that, if Jesus were referring to the ten commandments, or any commandments in the law, he would have said “the” commandments. Here, he speaks of “these” commandments, but did not specifically address any particular commandments leading up to this point. However, he does address specific commandments from this point, and they are not the ten commandments or commandments found in the law. Rather, he addresses his commandments to his followers, and in doing so, actually alters points of law way beyond jots and tittles.

The law allowed a man to divorce his wife for a variety of petty reasons, and could divorce the wife by giving her a bill of divorce. Jesus declares that this is wrong; it was not so in the beginning, and that anyone who marries a divorced woman under these circumstances, other than cases of sexual immorality, commits adultery. (See Mt. 19) If this was all about the law not being altered down to jots and tittles, Jesus just contradicted himself on a grand scale.

The law talks about performing one’s oaths to God, yet Jesus commands people not to swear at all.

The law commanded a tooth for a tooth; stripe for stripe, etc. but Jesus declares to behave in just the opposite manner.

The main point that comes out in context here is found in Mt. 5:20

For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

The righteousness the scribes and Pharisees had was the righteousness found in the law. It comes out in the rest of Scripture following the gospels is that a Christian’s righteousness is not found in the law, but in Christ Himself.

I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. — Galatians 2:21

And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: — Philippians 3:9

What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. — Romans 9:30-32

“These” commandments are the commandments Jesus talks about from that point forward: He is not talking about “the law and the prophets” as previously addressed in verses 17 and 18.

If however we take this understanding of Matthew 5:19 to be the commandments found in the law, we are also forced to agree that if one does not practice circumcision, and does not teach circumcision, whether it is the least commandment or not, that one will be in the kingdom of God, but in a diminished status.

The brings about an interesting conclusion. The apostle Paul did not teach circumcision. In fact, he taught the very opposite. He taught Gentiles not to be circumcised, and that if they did, they had fallen from grace.

Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. — Galatians 5:2-4

Paul, who took the gospel to the then known world, did not teach circumcision, and even commanded against it, contrary to the law. He was stoned; shipwrecked, beaten, and finally killed because of the faith he preached. But he will be among the least in the kingdom of God if we accept the view that Jesus in verse 19 was talking about the commandments in the law.

Likewise those that today teach tithing, do so by altering the law way beyond jots and tittles. In the law, tithes were assessed on the increase of produce and livestock, given to the Levites. Now, the teachers of the law insist tithes be assessed on wages, contrary to the law, and that the tithes be paid to them; also contrary to the law. This law that is claimed to not to be altered even down to the stroke of a letter of the law, has been corrupted so that a man should tithe on his wages, and not as the law commands.

The law commands tithes of the increase of one’s produce and livestock, and that it not be paid to a minister of Jesus Christ, but to the Levites. These who teach tithing have altered much more than jots and tittles, and taught men to do so likewise.

I said I would come back to this:

The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. — Luke 16:16-17

Either you see that Matthew 5:17-19 is talking about prophesies and that they were fulfilled without fail, or you stand condemned by your own beliefs.

The law and the prophets were until John, and not after. From John forward, the kingdom of God is preached. The law does not fail in this context. The “law” spoke of He who was to come, and spoke of the gospel; the kingdom of God, if you will, for it says in Hebrews:

For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

— Hebrews 4:2

So either this is all about the gospel and the prophesies concerning Jesus and the gospel being fulfilled “by the book” where “the law” cannot fail in that context, or you stand in that category of those who pervert the law, such as tithing, and condemn the apostle Paul as well.