This is a study of Jesus being here to fulfill the law. He said it needed to be fulfilled completely and He did it.

1. JESUS WAS HERE TO FULFILLTHE LAW
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Matthew 5:17-2017"Do not think that I have come to
abolishthe Law or the Prophets;I have not come to
abolishthem but to fulfill them. 18Fortruly I tell you,
until heaven and earth disappear,not the smallest
letter, not the least strokeof a pen, will by any means
disappearfrom the Law until everything is
accomplished. 19Thereforeanyone who sets aside one
of the least of these commands and teaches others
accordinglywill be calledleastin the kingdom of
heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these
commands will be called great in the kingdom of
heaven. 20ForI tell you that unless your righteousness
surpassesthat of the Pharisees and the teachers of the
law, you will certainlynot enter the kingdom of
heaven.
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES

2. Christ's Treatment Of The Old Testament
Matthew 5:17, 18
W.F. Adeney
Here we see the attitude of our Lord towards the Old Testament. He did not
come to destroy the ancientteaching, but to fulfil it. Christ's words show two
positions - a negative and a positive.
I. THE OLD TESTAMENTHAS A PLACE IN THE CHRISTIAN
ECONOMY. The grounds on which this is establishedare worthy of
consideration.
1. Its origin. The Old Testamentwas inspired by God. It records his words
spokento Moses andthe prophets. Words of Godare not to be lightly set
aside, howeverancient they may be.
2. Its truth. Although it is only a preliminary revelation, it.is not the less a real
revelation. The truth it contains is partial, and represents an early stage in the
development of Divine ideas among men; yet all truth has an eternal element
in it which we may discoverwhen we strip off the husk of its temporary form.
3. Its moral character. The Old Testamentis a grand testimony to
righteousness. We cannever dispense with the Ten Commandments. The
stern protests of the prophets againstnational sin stand goodto-day as the
utterances of an undying conscience.
4. Its spiritual life. It is difficult for a Christian to getbeyond the devotional
spirit of the Psalms. Private piety is revealedin the Old Testamentso as to be
the example and stimulus for all ages.

3. II. THE OLD TESTAMENTIS NOT A SUFFICIENT REVELATION. It was
defective by omission. It could not contain all truth, because whenit was
written the Jews were not capable of receiving all truth. Its limitations are
those of an early stage ofrevelation. These are not reasons forcondemning
and repudiating the book. The child is not to be blamed because he is not a
man. The adult man cannotafford to neglectthe child even on his own
account, for the child is a prophet from whom much may be learnt. Still, it
cannot be denied that he lacks the man's largerwisdom and more enduring
strength. The law of righteousness is not sufficient for us. It cannotcreate
goodness.Its directions are formal and external. The deeper, more spiritual
righteousness canonly be realizedwhen the Law is written on the heart, and
this is done, as Jeremiahpredicted, only under the new covenant(Jeremiah
31:33).
III. CHRIST FILLS UP THE DEFICIENCIES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
REVELATION. In this sense he fulfils it. He does not only fulfil prophecy by
doing what is therein predicted, but he makes the whole revelation of God
perfect by filling up the lacunae that appear in the Old Testament.
1. By leading from the letter to the spirit. The Law is not perfectedtill its
inner meaning is discoveredand its living spirit brought forth.
2. By exhibiting in life what the Old Testamentreveals in word. The Law had
never been perfectly kept till Christ came. Then he was absolutelyfaithful to
it, and thus he satisfiedits claims.
3. By giving men power to keepthe Law. Not in the letter, which is
superfluous, but in the spirit, which is essential.

4. 4. By including the inferior older revelation in his new and most perfect
revelation. The acorndisappears that the oak may be seen; but it is not
destroyed, it is only developed, and its glorificationis accomplishedby the
largergrowth which abolishes its own peculiar form and structure. - W.F.A.
Biblical Illustrator
But to fulfil.
Matthew 5:17
The moral law eternal and immutable
W. Kemp.
I. NEGATIVELY — that Christ did not come to destroy the law or the
prophets. This may be illustrated as follows.
1. If the cause be immutably good, the operation and effects must be the same;
especiallyif the cause be infinitely wise;all this is evident from the Word of

5. God. If any persons declare that the moral law is altered, to be consistent, they
must also suppose that the Divine nature is altered.
2. The law of God is perfect, the ceremoniallaw was imperfect. The moral law
being perfect, the impress of the Divine image, it cannotbe done away.
II. THE GREAT END THAT OUR LORD HAD IN VIEW WITH RESPECT
TO THE MORAL LAW — "to fulfil." He undertakes this important work
with the greatestcheerfulness, lie was obedient to the moral law in His
childhood. Sufferings were necessaryas wellas active obedience. Our Lord set
forth the spirituality of the moral law, and could not after that setabout to
destroy it.
(W. Kemp.)
Jesus Christ the moral legislator
J. C. Jones.
I. lie fulfilled the law by spiritualizing it.
II. He fulfilled the law by developing it.
III. He fulfilled the law by generalising it and making it universal.
1. Breaking downclass distinctions.
2. He abolished national distinctions in morality.

6. 3. He abolished sexdistinctions in morality.
(J. C. Jones.)
The mission of Christ in relation to the moral law
T. Baron., G. S. Barrett.
I. TO EXPOUND ITS SPIRITUALITY.
II. TO EMBODYITS PRINCIPLES.
III. TO HONOUR ITS BREACH.
1. It had been brokenin the practice of man, and He. came to atone for it.
2. It had been brokenin the estimation of man, and He came to show him its
glory.
IV. To SECURE ITS FULFILMENT.
1. By the presentationof a sufficient motive.
2. By the impartation of Divine power.

7. (T. Baron.)
I. The greatness ofthe assumption here made by Christ. Christ accepts the
prophecies of the Old Testamentas Divine, and points to Himself as their
fulfilment.
II. These words of Jesus revealthe historicalcontinuity of Christianity.
III. These words teachus the permanent authority of the moral principles of
the Jewishlaw. Nothing that is moral can be destroyed. We do not need the
light of stars when the sun has risen; but the stars are shining still.
(G. S. Barrett.)
Christ's relation to the law
W. G. Barrett.
I. Mark the POSITION our Saviour occupied, as forming a key to the whole
of the Sermon on the Mount.
II. The MEANING of these words.
1. Christ fulfilled the law in His teaching. He completedit.
2. Christ fulfilled the law by His own personal, unbroken obedience.

8. 3. Christ fulfilled the law by. His sufferings and death.
(W. G. Barrett.)
Positive religion
D. Swing.
I. In a critical age, that has so many errors to be destroyed, reasonacquires a
destructive habit; againstthis habit one must guard, lest, instead of being a
light to guide us, reasonbecomes only mildew to blight a world once beautiful.
II. The soul grows great, useful, and happy, not by what it denies, but by what
it cordially affirms and loves.
III. Should you not all seek union with some positive, active, trusting Church?
Let the Church you seek be broad, but not broad in its destructiveness, but in
its soul, hopes, and charity; not broad by the absence ofGod, but by His
infinite presence;not broad like the Sahara, in its treeless, birdless, dewless
sands; not broad like the Arctic Sea, in perpetual silence and ice, but broad
like an infinite paradise, full of all verdure, fruits, music, industry, happiness,
and worship; wide enough for all to come.
(D. Swing.)
Destructionthe law of increase
Beecher.
Christ certainly did come to destroythe law and the prophets — the outside of
them. He knew perfectly well, if He had foresight, that they would be, as they
have largely been, swept away;but He said, "Thatwhich these externalities

9. include — the kernel, the heart — I came to fulfil. It was not the morality and
spirituality for the sake ofwhich Mosesand the prophets had written that
were to be destroyed. Even a crab knows enoughonce a year to get rid of its
shell in order to have a biggerone: it is the sectarythat does not know it! Men
think, if you disturb beliefs, creeds, institutions, customs, methods, manners,
that of course you disturb all they contain; but Christ said, "No;the very way
to fulfil these things is to give them a chance to open a larger way." h bud
must be destroyed if you are going to have a flower. The flowermust be
destroyedif you are going to have a seed. The seedmust die if you are going to
have the same thing a hundred-fold increased.
(Beecher.)
Law tends to enlarge itself
Beecher., Hacket.
So all institutions that carry in themselves, not merely external procedure, but
methods of truth, justice, and righteousness, must of necessity, if they follow
the ages,dig their own graves. A law that canlast a thousand years is a law
that is inefficacious. A law that is active, influential, fruitful, destroys itself. It
is not large enough. It produces a state of things among men which requires
that the law itself should have a largerexpressionand a different application.
(Beecher.)As a painter laying fresh colours upon an old picture.
(Hacket.)
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

10. (17) Here a new sectionof the discourse begins, and is carriedon to the end of
the chapter. From the ideal picture of the life of the societywhich He came to
found, our Lord passes to a protest againstthe current teaching of the scribes,
sometimes adhering to the letter and neglecting the spirit, sometimes
overriding even the letter by unauthorised traditions—lowering the standard
of righteousness to the level of men’s practices, insteadof raising their
practices to the standard which God had fixed.
Think not that I am come.—The words imply that men had begun so to think.
The Teacherwho came preaching repentance, but also promising forgiveness,
was supposedto be what in later times has been calledAntinomian, attacking
the authority of the two great channels through which the will of God had
been revealed. “The Law and the prophets” were popularly equivalent to the
whole of the Old Testament, though a strict classificationrequired the
addition of the Hagiographa, or“holy writings,” i.e., the poeticaland
miscellaneous books.
I am not come.—Better, I came not. The words might be naturally used by
any teacherconsciousofa mission, but they gain a new meaning when we
remember that He who so spake was emphatically “He that should come;”
that “He came into the world” not in the same sense as other men, but in a
manner absolutely His own.
Not . . . to destroy, but to fulfil.—Explained by the immediate context, the
words would seemto point chiefly to our Lord’s work as a teacher. He came
to fill up what was lacking, to develop hints and germs of truth, to turn rules
into principles. Interpreted on a wider scale, He came to “fulfil the Law and
prophets,” as He came “to fulfil all righteousness”(3:15)by a perfect
obedience to its precepts, to fulfil whateverin it was typical of Himself and His
work by presenting the realities. The further thought that He came to fulfil
what are calledthe Messianicprophecies hardly comes within the range of the
words. No one could dream for a moment that the Christ could do anything
else, and throughout the whole discourse there is no reference to those

11. predictions. The prophets are named, partly in conformity with usage, partly
in their characteras ethical teachers, expounding and spiritualising the Law,
and preparing the way for a further and fuller development.
It may be noted as a singular instance of the boldness of some of the early
heretics, that Marcion, who rejectedthe Old Testamentaltogether,
maintained that these words had been altered by the Judaisers ofthe apostolic
age, and that the true reading was, “Think ye that I came to fulfil the Law or
the prophets? I came not to fulfil, but to destroy.”
BensonCommentary
Matthew 5:17. Think not that I am come to destroy — To abrogate, annul, or
repeal, (which seems to be the meaning of the word καταλυσαι, here,)the law
or the prophets — As your teachers do. It is manifest from the following
discourse, that our Lord principally spake ofthe moral law, severalof the
precepts of which he afterward explains and vindicates from the corrupt
glossesofthe scribes and Pharisees.For, as to the ceremoniallaw, though he
also came to fulfil it, as the greatantitype in whom all the types of it had their
accomplishment; yet he came to abrogate and repealit, blotting out and
nailing to his cross the hand-writing of ordinances, as the apostle speaks,
Colossians 2:14. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil — He fulfilled in
himself all those predictions of the prophets which had been uttered
Concerning the Messiah, andhe explained, illustrated, and establishedthe
moral law, in its highest meaning, both by his life and doctrine; and by his
merits and Spirit he provided, and still provides, for its being effectually
fulfilled in and by his followers. Our Lord has taught us, that all the law and
the prophets are comprehended in these two precepts, Thou shalt love the
Lord thy God with all thy heart, &c., and thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself, Matthew 22:40. St. Paul also informs us, that he who loves his
neighbour as himself, hath fulfilled the law, Romans 13:8; and Galatians 5:14,
that all the law is fulfilled in this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself;
this love of our neighbour being only found in those who first love God, and

12. being closelyconnectedwith, and indeed never separatedfrom, the love of
God. Now our Lord was manifested in the flesh, and made a propitiatory
sacrifice for our sins, that he might give us such a demonstration of his love,
and the love of the Father to us and all mankind, as might produce in us those
returns of love to God and man, which God should be pleasedto acceptas the
fulfilling of the law. Therefore we read, Romans 8:4, That God sent his own
Son in the likeness ofsinful flesh, that the righteousness ofthe law might be
fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
5:17-20 Let none suppose that Christ allows his people to trifle with any
commands of God's holy law. No sinner partakes ofChrist's justifying
righteousness, till he repents of his evil deeds. The mercy revealed in the
gospelleads the believer to still deeper self-abhorrence. The law is the
Christian's rule of duty, and he delights therein. If a man, pretending to be
Christ's disciple, encourages himselfin any alloweddisobedience to the holy
law of God, or teaches others to do the same, whateverhis stationor
reputation among men may be, he can be no true disciple. Christ's
righteousness, imputed to us by faith alone, is needed by every one that enters
the kingdom of grace or of glory; but the new creationof the heart to holiness,
produces a thorough change in a man's temper and conduct.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
Think not that I am come ... - Our Saviour was just entering on his work. It
was important for him to state what he came to do. By his setting up to be a
teacherin opposition to the scribes and Pharisees,some might charge him
with an intention to destroy their law, and to abolish the customs of the
nation. He therefore told them that he did not come for that end, but really to
fulfill or accomplishwhat was in the law and the prophets.
To destroy - To abrogate;to deny their divine authority; to setpeople free
from the obligationto obey them. "The law." The five books ofMoses called
the law. See the notes at Luke 24:44.

13. The Prophets - The books which the prophets wrote. These two divisions here
seemto comprehend the Old Testament, and Jesus says that he came not to do
awayor destroy the authority of the Old Testament.
But to fulfil - To complete the design; to fill up what was predicted; to
accomplishwhat was intended in them. The word "fulfill" also means
sometimes "to teach" or "to inculcate," Colossians 1:25. The law of Moses
containedmany sacrificesand rites which were designedto shadow forth the
Messiah. See the notes at Hebrews 9. These were fulfilled when he came and
offered himself a sacrifice to God,
"A sacrifice ofnobler name.
And richer blood than they."
The prophets contained many predictions respecting his coming and death.
These were all to be fulfilled and fully accomplishedby his life and his
sufferings.
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
Mt 5:17-48. Identity of These Principles with Those of the Ancient Economy;
in Contrastwith the Reigning Traditional Teaching.
Exposition of Principles (Mt 5:17-20).
17. Think not that I am come—thatI came.

14. to destroy the law, or the prophets—that is, "the authority and principles of
the Old Testament." (On the phrase, see Mt 7:12; 22:40;Lu 16:16;Ac 13:15).
This generalway of taking the phrase is much better than understanding "the
law" and "the prophets" separately, and inquiring, as many goodcritics do,
in what sense our Lord could be supposedto meditate the subversion of each.
To the various classes ofHis hearers, who might view such supposed
abrogationof the law and the prophets with very different feelings, our Lord's
announcement would, in effect, be such as this—"Ye who tremble at the word
of the Lord, fearnot that I am going to sweepthe foundation from under your
feet: Ye restless and revolutionary spirits, hope not that I am going to head
any revolutionary movement: And ye who hypocritically affectgreat
reverence for the law and the prophets, pretend not to find anything in My
teaching derogatoryto God's living oracles."
I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil—Not to subvert, abrogate, or annul, but
to establishthe law and the prophets—to unfold them, to embody them in
living form, and to enshrine them in the reverence, affection, and characterof
men, am I come.
Matthew Poole's Commentary
There are so many adversaries,Jews,papists, Socinians, Anabaptists,
Antinomians, &c., that make their advantages ofthis text, for the establishing
their severalerrors, that it would require a volume to vindicate it from their
severalexceptions;those who desire satisfactionmay read Spanhemius Dub.
Evang. 12.3. The plain sense of the text is this: It would have been a great
cavil, with the Jews especially, (who had a greatreverence for the law), if
either our Saviour’s enemies amongstthem could have persuaded people that
Christ came to destroy the law and the prophets, or his own hearers had
entertained from his discourse any such apprehensions. Our Saviour
designing, in his following discourse, to give a more full and strict
interpretation of the law than had been given by the Pharisees andother
Jewishdoctors, prefacesthat discourse with a protestationagainsthis coming

15. to destroy the law, and averring that he came
to fulfil it. It is manifest, by his following discourse, that he principally spake
of the moral law, though he also fulfilled the ceremoniallaw, he being the
Antitype in whom all the types of that had their complement, and real
fulfilling and accomplishment. Saith he, I am not come to destroyand put an
end to the moral law. I am come to fulfil it: not to fill it up, as papists and
Socinians contend, adding any new precept to it; but by yielding myself a
personalobedience to it, by giving a fuller and stricter interpretation of it
than you have formerly had, and by taking the curse of it (so far as
concernethmy disciples) upon myself, and giving a just satisfactionto Divine
justice for it. The greatestobjectionurgedagainstChrist destroying part of
the law, and adding new precepts to the moral law, is that about the change of
the sabbath; but this is none, if we considerthat the moral law required no
more than one day of sevento be kept as a day of holy rest, not this or that
particular day; for the particular day, the Jews learnedit from the ceremonial
law, as Christians learn theirs from Christ’s and the apostles’practice. Noris
it any objectionagainstthis, that the seventh day from the creationis
mentioned in the law, to those who know how to distinguish betweenthe
precept and the argument; the seventh from the creationis not in the precept,
but in the argument, Forin six days, & c. Now there is nothing more ordinary
than to have arguments of a particular temporary concernmentused to
enforce precepts of an eternal obligation, where the precepts were first given
to that particular people, as to whom those arguments were of force, an
instance of which is in the first commandment, as well as in this: as, on the
other side, arguments of universal force are oft annexed to precepts, which
had but a particular obligation upon a particular people for a time. Thus in
the ceremoniallaw, we often find it is an argument to enforce many
ceremonialprecepts, ForI am the Lord thy God.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

16. Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets,.... From verse 3
to the 10th inclusive, our Lord seems chiefly to respectthe whole body of his
true disciples and followers;from thence, to the 16th inclusive, he addresses
the disciples, whom he had calledto be ministers of the word; and in this
"verse", to the end of his discourse, he applies himself to the whole multitude
in general;many of whom might be ready to imagine, that by the light of the
Gospel, he was giving his disciples instructions to spreadin the world, he was
going to set aside, as useless, the law of Moses,orthe prophets, the
interpreters of it, and commentators upon it. Christ knew the thoughts of
their hearts, that they had takenup such prejudices in their minds against
him; wherefore he says, "think not"; he was sensible whatobjections they
were forming, and what an improvement they would make of them againsthis
being the Messiah, andtherefore prevents them, saying,
I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. By "the law" is meant the moral law, as
appears from the whole discourse following:this he came not to "destroy", or
loose men's obligations to, as a rule of walk and conversation, but "to fulfil"
it; which he did doctrinally, by setting it forth fully, and giving the true sense
and meaning of it; and practically, by yielding perfect obedience to all its
commands, whereby he became "the end", the fulfilling end of it. By "the
prophets" are meant the writings of the prophets, in which they illustrated
and explained the law of Moses;urged the duties of it; encouragedmen
thereunto by promises;and directed the people to the Messiah, and to an
expectationof the blessings ofgrace by him: all which explanations, promises,
and prophecies, were so far from being made void by Christ, that they receive
their full accomplishmentin him. The Jews (t) pretend that these words of
Christ are contrary to the religion and faith of his followers, who assert, that
the law of Moses is abolished; which is easily refuted, by observing the exact
agreementbetweenChrist and the Apostle Paul, Romans 3:31 and whenever
he, or any other of the apostles, speaks ofthe abrogationof the law, it is to be
understood of the ceremoniallaw, which in course ceasedby being fulfilled; or
if of the moral law, not of the matter, but of the ministry of it. This passageof
Christ is cited in the Talmud (u), after this manner:

17. "it is written in it, i.e. in the Gospel, "IAven", neither to diminish from the
law of Moses amI come, "but", or "nor" (for in the Amsterdam edition they
have inserted betweentwo hooks), to add to the law of Moses amI come.''
Which, with their last correction, though not a just citation, yet tolerably well
expresses the sense;but a most blasphemous characteris affixed to Christ,
when they call him "Aven"; which signifies "iniquity" itself, and seems to be a
wilful corruption of the word "Amen", which begins the next "verse".
(t) R. Isaac Chizuk Emuna, par. 2. c. 10. p. 401. (u) T. Bab. Sabbat. fol. 116. 2.
Geneva Study Bible
{3} Think not that I am come to destroythe law, or the prophets: I am not
come to destroy, but {g} to fulfil.
(3) Christ did not come to bring any new way of righteousness and salvation
into the world, but indeed to fulfil that which was shadowedby the figures of
the Law, by delivering men through grace from the curse of the Law: and
moreoverto teachthe true use of obedience which the Law appointed, and to
engrave in our hearts the powerfor obedience.
(g) That the prophecies may be accomplished.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Meyer's NT Commentary
Matthew 5:17.[399]A connectionwith what precedes is not to be artificially
sought out. Jesus breaks offand introduces the new sectionwithout any
intermediate remarks, which corresponds, preciselyto its pre-eminent

18. importance (for He shows how the Christian δικαιοσύνη, having its root in
that of the Old Testament, is its consummation). On μὴ νομίς. ὅτι ἠλθ., comp.
Matthew 10:34.
Ἤ] never stands for ΚΑΊ (see Winer, p. 410 [E. T. 549 f.]; comp. on 1
Corinthians 11:27), but is always distinctive. Here, to abrogate the one or the
other. I have to abrogate neither that nor this. The νόμος is the divine institute
of the law, which has its originaldocument in the Pentateuch. The further Old
Testamentrevelation, in so far as its final aim is the Messiahand His work, is
representedby οἱ προφῆται, who make up its principal part; accordingly, Ὁ
ΝΌΜΟς andοἱ προφῆται summarily denote the whole Old Testament
revelation (comp. Luke 16:6), partly as a living divine economy, as here;
partly as γραφή, as in Luke 24:27; Acts 24:14;Acts 28:23;Romans 3:21.
Moreover, in the expressiontow ΤΟῪς ΠΡΟΦΉΤΑς we are not to think of
their predictions as such (the Greek Fathers, Augustine, Beza, Calovius, and
others; also Tholuck, Neander, Harnaek, Bleek,Lechler, Schegg, and others),
as nobody could imagine that their abrogationwas to be expected from the
Messiah, but, as the connectionwith νόμος shows (and comp. Matthew 7:12,
Matthew 22:40; Luke 16:29), and as is in keeping with the manner in which
the idea is carriedout in the following verses, their contents as commands, in
which respectthe prophets have carried on the development of the law in an
ethical manner (Ritschl, altkath. Kirche, p. 36 f.). In νόμος, however, to think
merely of the moral law is erroneous, as it always signifies the entire law, and
the distinction betweenthe ritualistic, civil, and moral law is modern; comp.
on Romans 3:20. If, afterwards, sentencesare givenfrom the moral law, yet
these are only quotations by way of illustration from the whole, from which,
however, the moral precepts very naturally suggestedthemselves for
quotations, because the idea of righteousness is before the mind. He has
fulfilled the entire law, and in so doing has not destroyed the slightest
provision of the ritualistic or civil code, so far as its generalmoral idea is
concerned, but preciselyeverything which the law prescribes is raised to an
ideal, of which the old legalcommands are only στοιχεῖα. Theophylactwell
illustrates the matter by the instance of a silhouette, which the painter Οὐ
ΚΑΤΑΛΎΕΙ, but carries out to completion, ἀναπληροῖ.

19. καταλῦσαι]oftenemployed by classicalwriters to denote the dissolution of
existing constitutions (specially also of the abrogationof laws, Isocr. p. 129 E;
Polyb. iii. 8. 2), which are thereby rendered non-existent and invalid; comp.
2Ma 2:22; John 7:23; also ΝΌΜΟΝ ΚΑΤΑΡΓΕῖΝ, Romans 3:31;ἈΘΕΤΕῖΝ,
Hebrews 10:28; Galatians 3:15.
The ΠΛΉΡΩΣΙς of the law and the prophets is their fulfilment by the re-
establishment of their absolute meaning, so that now nothing more is wanting
to what they ought to be in accordance withthe divine ideas which lie at the
foundation of their commands. It is the perfect development of their ideal
reality out of the positive form, in which the same is historically apprehended
and limited. So substantially, Luther, Calvin (comp. before them Chrysostom;
he, however, introduces what is incongruous), Lightfoot, Hammond, Paulus,
Gratz, de Wette, Olshausen, Ritschl, Ewald, Weiss, Hilgenfeld; likewise
Schleiermacher, L. J. p. 314 ff., and others. Comp. Tholuck (who, however,
brings togetherthe too varying elements of different explanations), also
Kahnis, Dogmat. I, p. 474, who understands it as the development of what is
not completedinto something higher, which preserves the substance of the
lower. This explanation, which makes absolute the righteousness enjoinedand
setforth in the law and the prophets, is converted into a certainty by the two
verses that follow. The matter is representedby πληρ. as a making complete
(John 15:11; 2 Corinthians 10:6), in opposition to καταλῦσαι, whichexpresses
the not allowing the thing to remain. Others (Bretschneider, Fritzsche): facere
quae de Messia pre-scripta sunt; others (Käuffer, B. Crusius, Bleek, Lechler,
Weizsäcker, afterBeza, Eisner, Vorst, Wolf, and many older interpreters):
legi satisfacere,as in Romans 13:8, where, in reference to the prophets, πληρ.
is takenin the common sense of the fulfilment of the prophecies (see specially,
Euth. Zigabenus, Calovius, and Bleek), but thereby introducing a reference
which is not merely opposedto the context(see Matthew 5:18 f.), but also an
unendurable twofold reference of πληρ.[400]Luther well says:“Christ is
speaking ofthe fulfilment, and so deals with doctrines, in like manner as He
calls ‘destroying’ a not acting with works againstthe law, but a breaking off

20. from the law with the doctrine.” The fulfilling is “showing the right kernel
and understanding, that they may learn what the law is and desires to have.”
I did not come to destroy, but to fulfil; the objectis understood of itself, but
the declarationdelivered in this generalwayis more solemnwithout the
addition of the pronoun.
[399]Specialwritings upon the passage:—Baumgarten, doctrina J. Ch. de
lege Mos. ex oral. mont. 1838;Harnack, Jesus d. Christ oder der Erfüller d.
Gesetzes, 1842;J. E. Meyer, über d. Verhältn. Jesuund seinerJünger zum
alttest. Gesetz. 1853.See especially, Ritschl, altkathol. K. p. 35 ff.; Bleek in d.
Stud. u. Krit. 1853, p. 304;Lechler, ibidem, 1854, p. 787 ff.; Weiss, ibidem,
1858, p. 50 ff., and bibl. Theol. § 27; Ewald, Jahrb. X. p. 114 ff. The collection
of sayings is to be simply regarded as the source of this section, not any special
treatise upon the position of Jesus towards that law (Holtzmann); comp.
Weiss in d. Stud. u. Krit. 1864, p. 56 f.
[400]Vitringa, who compares ‫,רמנ‬ even brings out the meaning “to expound.”
The explanation of Kuinoel goes back to the legi satisfacere, but gives as
meaning, docendo vivendoque stabilire. Comp. Keim, “to teachthe law, to do
it, and to impose it.” The older dogmatic exegetes, who explained it by
satisfacere, here found the satisfactio activa. See,for example, Er. Schmid and
Calovius;recently, Philippi, vom thät. Gehors. Chr. p. 34;Baumgarten, p. 15.
On the other hand, B. Crusius and also Tholuck. According to Bleek, p. 304,
Christ has fulfilled the moral law by His sinless life, the ceremoniallaw by His
sacrificialdeath, by means of which the prophecies also are fulfilled.
According to Lechler, Jesus fulfils the law as doer, by His holy life and
sacrificialdeath; as teacher, in teaching mankind rightly to understand and
fulfil the commandments.

21. REMARK.
The Apostle Paul workedquite in the sense of our passage;his writings are
full of the fulfilment of the law in the sense in which Christ means it; and his
doctrine of its abrogationrefers only to its validity for justification to the
exclusionof faith. It is without any ground, therefore, that this passage, and
especiallyMatthew 5:18 f., have been regardedby Baur (neutest. Theol. p. 55)
as Judaistic, and supposednot to have proceededin this form from Jesus,
whom, rather in opposition to the higher standpoint alreadygained by Him,
(Schenkel), the Apostle Matthew has apprehended and edited in so Judaistic a
manner (Köstlin, p. 55 f.), or the supposedMatthew has made to speak in so
anti-Pauline a way (Gfrörer, h. Sage, II. p. 84); according to Hilgenfeld, in his
Zeitschr. 1867, p. 374, Matthew 5:17 is indeed original, but in accordancewith
the view of the Hebrew gospel;Matthew 5:18 f., however, is an anti-Pauline
addition; Weizsäckerseesin Matthew 5:19 only an interpolation; but
Schenkelfinds in Matthew 5:18 f. the proud assertionof the Pharisee, not
Jesus’ownconviction. Paul did not advance beyond this declaration(comp.
Planck in d. theol. Jahrb. 1847, p. 268 ff.), but he applied his right
understanding boldly and freely, and in so doing the breaking up of the old
form by the new spirit could not but necessarilybegin, as Jesus Himself
clearly recognised(comp. Matthew 9:16; John 4:21; John 4:23 f.) and set
forth to those who believed in His own person and His completed
righteousness (comp. Ritschl). But even in this self-representationofChrist
the new principle is not severedfrom the O. T. piety, but is the highest
fulfilment of the latter, its anti-typical consummation, its realized ideal.
Christianity itself is in so far a law. Comp. Wittichen, p. 328;Holtzmann, p:
457 f.; Weizsäcker, p. 348 f.; see also on Romans 3:27; Galatians 6:2; 1
Corinthians 9:21.
Matthew 5:17-48. Messianic fulfilment of the law by the setting forth of which
Jesus now, after He had made clearto the disciples their high destiny, desired
to establish, before all other things the relation of Sis ministry to the religion

22. of the Old Testament, introducing it, indeed, with μὴ νομίσητε, κ.τ.λ.;because
the thought of an abrogationof the law by the Messiah(which was actually
current among the Jews, upon the basis of Jeremiah31:31, see Gfrörer,
Jahrh. d. Heils, II. p. 341), and therewith a renewalof religion from the very
foundation, might easilysuggestitselfso as to become highly injurious, and
might give to the work of the disciples themselves an altogetherperverted
direction, as it was, moreover, maliciously laid hold of by their enemies in
order to accuse the Lord (Matthew 26:61) and His disciples (Acts 6:14; Acts
21:21). The more designedly Jesus introduces and carries through this part (of
His discourse), the less does it suffice to assume the occasionthereto as arising
from the law retiring into the backgroundin His daily life, and from a neglect
of the law thus inferred (Keim); or from this, that Jesus was accustomedto set
out, not from the law, but from the universal truths of faith, from testimonies
of nature and life (Weizsäcker, p. 346). In this way the twice sharply
emphasized “destroy” especiallywouldappear altogetherout of proportion.
Expositor's Greek Testament
Matthew 5:17-20. Jesus defines His position. At the period of the Teaching on
the Hill Jesus felt constrainedto define His ethical and religious position all
round, with reference to the O. T. as the recognisedauthority, and also to
contemporary presentations ofrighteousness. The disciples had already heard
Him teachin the synagogues(Matthew 4:23)in a manner that at once
arrestedattention and led hearers to recognisein Him a new type of teacher
(Mark 1:27), entirely different from the scribes (Mark 1:22). The sentences
before us contain just such a statement of the Teacher’sattitude as the
previously awakenedsurprise of His audiences would lead us to expect. There
is no reasonto doubt their substantial authenticity though they may not
reproduce the precise words of the speaker;no ground for the suggestionof
Holtzmann (H. C.) that so decided a position either for or againstthe law was
not likely to be taken up in Christ’s time, and that we must find in these vv.
and anti-Pauline programme of the Judaists. At a first glance the various
statements may appearinconsistent with eachother. And assuming their
genuineness, they might easilybe misunderstood, and give rise to disputes in
the apostolic age,orbe takenhold of in rival interests. The words of great
epoch-making men generallyhave this fate. Though apparently contradictory

23. they might all proceedfrom the many-sided mind of Jesus, andbe so reported
by the genialGalileanpublican in his Logia. The best guide to the meaning of
the momentous declarationthey contain is acquaintance with the generaldrift
of Christ’s teaching (vide Wendt, Die Lehre Jesu, ii., 330). Verbal exegesiswill
not do much for us. We must bring to the words sympathetic insight into the
whole significance of Christ’s ministry. Yet the passageby itself, wellweighed,
is more luminous than at first it may seem.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
B. The Kingdom of Heaven is a fulfilment of the law, Matthew 5:17-48. Stated
generally, Matthew 5:17-20.
17. I am come …] Lit. I came.
Bengel's Gnomen
Matthew 5:17. Μὴ νομίσητε, Do not think) An elliptical mode of speechby
Metonomy of the Consequent.[182]Do not think, fear, hope, that I am a
teacherlike those teachers to whom you have been accustomed, and that I,
like them, shall setaside the law. He who thinks the former, thinks also the
latter.—ἦλθον, I have come) Our Lord, therefore, existed before He came
upon earth, which is implied also in ch. Matthew 8:10, by εὖρον, I have
found.—καταλῦσαι, to destroy, to abrogate)To the compound verb,
καταλύειν, to unloose or dissolve, is opposedπληροῦν, to fulfil; to the simple
verb λύειν, to loose, combinedwith διδάσκειν, to teach, is opposedποιεῖν, to
do, or perform, joined with the same verb διδάσκειν:from which the relative
force of the words appears; those are said of the whole law, these of the
separate precepts. καταλύειν, to unloose, and λύειν, to loose, both signify to
render void.[183]—τὸννόμονἤ τοὺς προφήτας, the law or the prophets) Many
of the Jews esteemedthe prophets less than the law. They are joined also in
ch. Matthew 7:12.—πληρῶσαι, to fulfil) By My deeds and words, to effectthat
all things should be fulfilled which the law requires. See the conclusionof the
next verse.[184]The Rabbins acknowledgethatit is a signof the Messiahto
fulfil the whole law.

24. [182]The consequent—thatI, like them, shall setaside the law: the
antecedent—thatI am a teacherlike those to whom you are accustomed.—(I.
B.)
[183]The Latin verb solvo, which is used in this passage,represents the Greek
λύω far more fully and accuratelythan any English word can. καταλύω is also
more adequately rendered by dissolvo than by any English word.—(I. B.)
[184]He was not the founder of a new law;but, by His own obedience,
Himself fulfilled the law, and showedhow it should be fulfilled by His
disciples.—Vers. Germ.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 17- Matthew 6:18. - Having spokenof the ideal characterof his disciples
(vers. 3-10), and of their need of allowing that characterto appear (vers. 11-
16), our Lord turns to speak of the position that they should hold towards the
religion of the day (ver. 17 - Matthew 6:18), of which the Law was the
acceptedstandard. Verses 17-20. -
(1) With this aim he first states summarily and in nucleus the position that he
himself holds towards the Law - a statement which was the more necessaryas
he had already (ver. 11) claimed to be the objectof his disciples'devotion.
Verse 17. - Matthew only. Think not. Probably the tendency of his teaching
was even already seento be so different from that of the recognized
authorities, that some had in consequence formedthis opinion (νομίζω) of him
which he now repudiates, and which was near akin to the basis of the charge
formulated afterwards againstSt. Stephen (Acts 6:14). In both casesthe
tendency of the new teaching (Mark 1:27) to abolish temporary forms was
perceivedby at leastthose whose powers of perceptionwere quickened
through their opposition. That I am come;RevisedVersion, that I came (ὅτι

25. η΅λθον). Our Lord, both here and in the next clause, lays stress on his coming
as an historic fact. The primary reference is probably to his coming forth
from private life (cf. John 1:31). Yet in his own mind there may have been a
further allusion to his coming from above (cf. John 8:14; and further,
Matthew 10:34). To destroy. The connexion betweenκαταλῦσαι here and
λύσῃ ver. 19 (vide note) is lost in the English. The Law or the Prophets. The
Phrase,'" the law and the prophets," is sometimes used as practically
equivalent to the whole of the Old Testament(Matthew 7:12; John 1:45;
Romans 3:21; cf. Matthew 11:13; Matthew 22:40;Acts 24:14),and our Lord
means probably much the same here, the "or" distributing the καταλῦσαι (cf.
Alford), and being used because ofthe negative. Such a distribution, however,
though it could not have been expressedin an affirmative sentence, has for its
backgroundthe consciousness ofa difference in the nature of these two chief
components of the Old Testament. Observe that the third part of the Hebrew
Scriptures, "the (Holy) Writings" - of which 'Psalms'(Luke 24:44) form the
most characteristic portion - is omitted in this summary reference to the Old
Testament. The reasonmay be either that of the three parts it was used less
than the other two as a basis for doctrine and for rule of life, or that it was
practically included in the Prophets (Acts 2:30). The essentialteaching ofthe
Law may be distinguished from that of the Prophets by saying that, while the
Law was the direct revelationof God's will as law for the people's daily life -
personal, social, and national - the Prophets (including the historical books
and the prophets proper) were rather the indirect revelation of his will for
them under the fresh circumstances into which they came;this indirect
revelation being seenmore especiallyin God's providential guidance of the
nation, and in his explanation of principles of worship, as well as in occasional
predictions of the future. It is to his relation to the Prophets in this connexion,
as an indirect revelationof God's will under changing circumstances (cf.
Weiss)that our Lord here chiefly refers. Forhe is led to speak ofhis own
relation to them from the bearing that this has on the conduct of his disciples.
Many, however(e.g. Chrysostom), considerthat he is thinking of his relation
to them as containing predictions concerning himself. In answerto this it is
not sufficient to say (Meyer, Weiss, Alford) that it was impossible that
Messiahcouldbe thought to abrogate the Prophets;for, in fact, to many Jews
during his ministry (even if not at this early stage of it), and much more to

26. Jews atthe time when the evangelistrecordedthe words, our Lord must have
seemedto contradict the predictions about himself as they were then
understood. It is indeed true that the prima facie ground that existedfor
thinking that our Lord's teaching was opposed, not merely to the religion of
the day as dependent on the Law and the Prophets, but also to the predictions
of Messiahcontainedin them, is enough to give a certainplausibility to this
interpretation. But that is all. The absence in the contextof any hint that he
refers to his relation to predictions as such quite forbids our accepting it. It
was probably derived solelyfrom a misinterpretation of "fulfil" (vide infra),
no regard being paid to the train of thought by which our Lord was led to
speak of the subject at all. Our Lord says that he is not come to "destroy" the
Prophets as exponents of the will of God. I am not come to destroy;
emphasizing his statementby repetition. But to fulfil. By establishing the
absolute and final meaning of the Law and the Prophets. Christ came not to
abrogate the Law or the Prophets, but to satisfy them - to bring about in his
own Person, and ultimately in the persons of his followers, that righteousness
of life which, howeverlimited by the historicalconditions under which the
Divine oracles hadbeen delivered, was the sum and substance of their
teaching. The fulfilment of the Law and the Prophets "is the perfect
development of their ideal reality out of the positive form, in which the same is
historically apprehended and limited" (Meyer). Martensenputs the matter
thus: "How canhe saythat not a tittle shall pass from the Law, since the
development of the Church shows us that the ceremonial law, that the whole
Mosaic dispensation, has beenannihilated by the influences proceeding from
Christ? We answer:He has fulfilled the Law, whilst he has releasedit from
the temporary forms in which its eternalvalidity was confined; he has
unfolded its spiritual essence,its inward perfection. Not even a tittle of the
ceremoniallaw has passedaway, if we regard the Mosaic Law as a whole; for
the ideas which form its basis, as the distinction betweenthe unclean and the
clean, are confirmed by Christ, and contained in the law of holiness which he
teaches men" ('Christian Ethics: General,'§ 125); cf. ver. 18, notes, "till
heaven and earth pass," "tillall be fulfilled."

27. PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES
BRUCE HURT M D
Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I
did not come to abolishbut to fulfill. (NASB: Lockman)
Greek:Me nomisete (2PAAS) hoti elthon (AAI) katalusai(AAN) ton nomon e
tous prophetas; ouk elthon (AAI) katalusai(AAN) alla plerosai. (AAN)
BGT Μὴ νομίσητε ὅτι ἦλθον καταλῦσαι τὸννόμονἢ τοὺς προφήτας·οὐκ
ἦλθον καταλῦσαι ἀλλὰ πληρῶσαι.
Amplified: Do not think that I have come to do awaywith or undo the Law or
the Prophets;I have come not to do away with or undo but to complete and
fulfill them. (Amplified Bible - Lockman)
ASV Think not that I came to destroythe law or the prophets: I came not to
destroy, but to fulfil.
CSB "Don't assume that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not
come to destroy but to fulfill.
ESV "Do not think that I have come to abolishthe Law or the Prophets;I
have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

28. GWN "Don'tever think that I came to setaside Moses'Teachings orthe
Prophets. I didn't come to setthem aside but to make them come true.
KJV: Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not
come to destroy, but to fulfill.
NLT: "Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the
law of Moses orthe writings of the prophets. No, I came to fulfill them. (NLT -
Tyndale House)
NLT (revised) "Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to
abolish the law of Moses orthe writings of the prophets. No, I came to
accomplishtheir purpose.
NET "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I
have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them.
NIV "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.
NKJ "Do not think that I came to destroythe Law or the Prophets. I did not
come to destroy but to fulfill.
NRS "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I
have come not to abolish but to fulfill.

29. NAB "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I
have come not to abolish but to fulfill.
NJB 'Do not imagine that I have come to abolishthe Law or the Prophets. I
have come not to abolish but to complete them.
Philips: "You must not think I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
I have not come to abolish them but to complete them. (New Testamentin
Modern English)
Wuest: Do not begin to suppose that I came to destroy the law or the
prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. (
Wuest: Expanded Translation: Eerdmans
)
Young's Literal: 'Do not suppose that I came to throw down the law or the
prophets -- I did not come to throw down, but to fulfill;
DO NOT THINK THAT I CAME TO ABOLISH THE LAW OR THE
PROPHETS;I DID NOT COME TO ABOLISH: Me nomisete (2PAAS) hoti
elthon (AAI) katalusai(AAN) ton nomon e tous prophetas; ouk elthon (AAI)
katalusai(AAN)
Luke 16:17; John 8:5; Acts 6:13; 18:13;21:28; Romans 3:31; Ro 10:4;
Galatians 3:17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24

30. Romans 5 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries
Matthew 5:17 Christ and the Law, Part 1 - John MacArthur
Matthew 5:18 Christ and the Law, Part 2 - John MacArthur
AVOID AN ERRONEOUS
SUPPOSITION
Jesus did not come to abolish or do awaywith the Old TestamentLaw but to
be the perfect, final fulfillment of every jot and tittle of the OT Law.
Do not think that I came to abolish the law or the prophets - The way this is
phrased indicates that Jesus must have sensedthat some of the audience
thought he was advocating an overthrow of the Old TestamentLaw. On the
other hand, considering the heavy burden that had been placed upon them by
the Pharisees, they may have been hoping that Jesus would abolishthe Law
and the rigid requirements that the Pharisees hadestablishedin order for one
to be righteous. In this context, the King gives His unforgettable disclaimer,
which sets down for all time His relationship to the Law. It is interesting that
Jesus had yet to mention the word "Law" in his discourse.
A B Bruce: These words betray a consciousnessthat there was that in His
teaching and bearing which might create suchan impression, and are a
protest againsttaking a surface impression for the truth. (Matthew 5
Commentary)
Charles Simeon - To have just sentiments on religion is a matter of
incalculable importance. Whilst we are mistaken respecting any fundamental
truths, we not only lose the benefit and comfort of those truths, but are in
danger of rejecting them when proposed to our consideration, and enlisting

31. ourselves amongstthe avowedenemies of the Gospel. The Jews were almost
universally expecting a temporal Messiah. Hence, whenour blessedLord
appearedin such mean circumstances, andinculcated doctrines so opposite to
their carnal expectations, the people thought either that he was an impostor
who deceivedthem, or that he was come to subvert and destroy all that had
been delivered to them by their forefathers. Our blessedLord anticipated and
obviated their objections:“Think not,” says he, “that I am come to destroy the
law and the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.” (Read the entire
sermon - Matthew 5:17-18 The Law and the Prophets Confirmed by Christ)
Think (3543)(nomizo from nomos = law, custom) means to suppose, assume,
regard or acknowledge as custom. It means to follow or practice what is
customary, in this case a particular way of thinking.
In Mt 5:21-48 Jesus focusesattentionon the Law and clearlyshows that the
external keeping of the Law is not enough. There has to be a corresponding
internal or heart change (one OT term was circumcisionof the heart, cp Dt
10:16, 30:6, Jer 4:4, Ro 2:29-note). Some in His audience might feelas if He
opposedto the Law, since His interpretation was not the same that they had
heard from the Pharisees.And so for severalreasons,Jesus explains He would
not abolishbut fulfill the Law.
Stephen was accusedofspeaking againstthe Law, Luke recording that
Then they (Jews from what was calledthe Synagogue ofthe Freedmen)
secretlyinduced men to say, "We have heard him (Stephen) speak
blasphemous words againstMosesand againstGod (note word order suggest
they were more concernedabout offending Moses than God!)." And they
stirred up the people, the elders and the scribes, and they came upon him and
draggedhim away, and brought him before the Council. And they put

32. forward false witnesses who said, "This man incessantlyspeaks againstthis
holy place, and the Law; for we have heard him say that this Nazarene, Jesus,
will destroy this place and alter the customs which Moses handeddown to
us." (Acts 6:11-14+)
Paul was accusedofopposing the Law…
But while Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews with one accordrose up
againstPaul and brought him before the judgment seat, saying, "This man
persuades men to worship God contrary to the law." (Acts 18:12, 13+)
MacArthur has an interesting note writing that "The Jews in Corinth claimed
that Paul’s teaching was external to Judaism, and therefore should be banned.
Had Gallio ruled in the Jews’favor, Christianity could have been outlawed
throughout the Empire" The MacArthur Study Bible. Nashville:Word Pub)
And againPaul was falselyaccusedof opposing the Law…
And when the sevendays were almost over, the Jews from Asia, upon seeing
him (Paul) in the temple, began to stir up all the multitude and laid hands on
him, crying out, "Men of Israel, come to our aid! This is the man who
preaches to all men everywhere againstour people, and the Law, and this
place;and besides he has even brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled
this holy place." (Acts 21:27-28+)
In Romans 3 Paul affirms Jesus'declarationasking…

33. Do we then nullify (make ineffective the power or force of) the Law through
faith? May it never be! (Of course not!) On the contrary, we establishthe
Law. (NLT "In fact, only when we have faith do we truly fulfill the law") (Ro
3:31+)
In Romans 10 Paul explains the relationship of Christ to the Law writing
that…
Christ is the end of the Law [… for the Law leads up to Him Who is the
fulfillment of its types, and in Him the purpose which it was designedto
accomplishis fulfilled. That is, the purpose of the Law is fulfilled in Him] as
the means of righteousness (right relationship to God) for everyone who trusts
in and adheres to and relies on Him. (Amplified Version) (Ro 10:4+)
Romans 8:3-4+ explains the Law was not meant to save men
For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did:
sending His ownSon in the likeness ofsinful flesh and as an offering for sin,
He condemned sin in the flesh, 4so that the requirement of the Law might be
fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the
Spirit.
Abolish (2647)(kataluo from kata = down + luo = loose, untie; release, set
free) means to setaside, to destroy, pull down, to break up, to loosendown
(disintegrate), to demolish. The idea is to abrogate (to abolish by authoritative
action) or setaside in the exercise oflegislative authority. To the religious Jew
even the thought of such a thing would be a profanity.

34. Kataluo - 17x in 16v - abolish(2), destroy(5), destroyed(1), find lodging(1),
guest(1), overthrow(1), overthrown(1), tear down(1), torn down(4).Matt5:17;
24:2; 26:61; 27:40;Mark 13:2; 14:58; 15:29;Luke 9:12; 19:7; 21:6; Acts
5:38f; 6:14; Rom 14:20;2 Cor 5:1; Gal2:18.
A B Bruce - A Greaterthan the OT, than Moses and the prophets, is here. But
the Greateris full of reverence for the institutions and sacredbooks ofHis
people. He is not come to disannul either the law or the prophets. (Matthew 5
Commentary)
The Law or the Prophets - Note that Law and prophets is connectedby "or"
not "and". The point is that Jesus is not signifying the entire Old Testament.
(see all NT uses - click), but as distinct parts. Jesus indeed had come to fulfill
both parts, the Law (He kept it perfectly and took it's penalty of death for
breaking it) and the Prophets (He fulfilled all the Messianic prophecies), but
since His greatconflict with the Pharisees was overthe Law, He focusedHis
remarks on that aspectof the OT teaching.
Law (3551)(nomos, torah in Hebrew) is relatedetymologicallyto something
parceledout, allotted, what one has in use and possession;hence, usage,
custom). Generally, "the Law" refers to the Pentateuch, the first five books of
the OT. More generallyhowever, the law can mean a wide variety of things –
a commandment, a principle, an instruction, etc. The meaning of the law,
therefore, is best determined by examining its use in context.
Calvin wrote that did not abolish the Law but "He only restoredit [the Law]
to its integrity by maintaining and purifying it when obscuredby the
falsehood, and defiled by the leaven of the Pharisees.

35. Albert Barnes - Our Saviour was just entering on his work. It was important
for him to state what he came to do. By his setting up to be a teacherin
opposition to the Scribes and Pharisees,some might charge him with an
intention to destroy their law, and abolish the customs of the nation. (Matthew
5)
Sinclair Fergusonmakes aninteresting observationthat "By this point in His
sermon, Jesus has made it very clearwhat belonging to the kingdom of God
means. What he has said is startling enough. But in some ways, what he has
not saidis even more startling. He has saidnothing about the law and the
importance of keeping it. He has said nothing about the traditional
interpretations of the law, and the importance of observing them. No
statementhas issued from his lips encouraging reverence forthe scribes and
the Pharisees. Didthis mean that Jesus was overthrowing the law? He
certainly was teaching that the way of salvationand entry into God's kingdom
was not by merit gained through obedience to the law. Rather than feeling
that they had achievedmerit, Jesus'followers were poorin spirit, mourned
for their sins, and received comfort and the kingdom of God. To the listening
scribes and Pharisees, this must have sounded for all the world like the
abolition of religion and of everything they stoodfor. So far, Jesus had said
people could enter God's kingdom by God's grace;he had made not one single
mention of the law! (Ferguson, Sinclair:Sermon on the Mount :Banner of
Truth)
Prophets (4396)(prophetes from pró = before or forth + phemí = tell) means
to speak forth or speak before (in time). In the NT uses, prophetes referred
usually to a person in the OT who spoke under divine influence and
inspiration thus foretelling future events or exhorting, reproving, and
threatening of individuals or nations as the ambassadorofGod and the
interpreter of His will to men. Hence the prophet spoke not his own thoughts
but what he receivedfrom God, retaining, however, his own consciousness
and self–possession.

36. Note that the Old TestamentLaw canbe thought of in three divisions
(although in fairness it needs to be statedthat not all conservative evangelical
commentaries agree with these subdivisions):
1) Moral Law - as in the 10 Commandments (only the keeping of the Sabbath
is not commanded in the NT)
2) CeremonialLaw - as seenin the shadows and types in the Tabernacle, the
Jewishsacrificialsystem, the Feastdays
3) Civil Law - the judicial laws that governed the nation of Israelin the OT -
e.g., the cities of refuge, stoning for certainoffenses, etc
RelatedResources:
What is the difference between the ceremoniallaw, the moral law, and the
judicial law in the Old Testament?
What does it mean that Christians are not under the law?
What did the Law mean when it referred to a lasting ordinance?
Jesus fulfilled all of these aspects ofthe Law. In the NT, only the moral law
remains applicable to the believer. The ceremonialand civil law are not
abolishedbut as Jesus stated"fulfilled" in Him. And yet many Christians
remain confusedand uncertain about significance ofthe Law even after
sitting in church for years. They have no firm grasp of what role the Law
plays in their lives today. So that will be the thrust of this lesson. (Click for
more commentary on "Law and Believer")

37. Spurgeon- The life, work, and words of Christ are not an emendation of the
Old Testament, oran abrogationof it. It stands fast and firm, fulfilled, carried
to perfection, filled to the full in Christ.
In regard to the moral aspectof the Law, the Holman NT Commentary writes
that…
Two pivotal passages(Jeremiah31:31, 32, 33, 34;Ezekiel36:26, 27)explain
how, under the New Covenant, the same law (the very characterofGod) is not
to be an external standard, but its values are to become an intrinsic part of
newly recreatedpeople. In a way, Jesus was teaching something that was not
yet completelypossible for people to follow. It is goodto say, "People should
move from external obedience to an obedience motivated by the law written
upon the heart." But this is an impossibility until the heart is transformed and
the very person of God himself, along with his righteous characteras
expressedin the law, comes to abide in one's heart. What Jesus taught would
become a reality in the lives of God's people after his death sealedthe new
covenantand made possible the promised internal transformation. (Weber,
Stuart, Max E. Anders, Ed: Holman New TestamentCommentary: Matthew)
John Newtonthe convertedslave trader wrote that "Ignorance ofthe nature
and designof the law is at the bottom of most of our religious mistakes."
Is this statementby Newtonall too true? How many Christians are still
confusedand uncertain about the law even after sitting in church all their life.
They have no solid conceptof what role the law plays in their lives today.

38. "Forall the prophets and the Law prophesieduntil John (speaking ofJohn
the Baptist). (Mt 11:13)
Not (3756)(ou) indicates Jesus'absolute denial ("absolutelyno way")that He
had come to do awaywith the Law and the Prophets (OT).
Spurgeoncomments that…
Very greatmistakes have been made about the law. Not long ago there were
those about us who affirmed that the law is utterly abrogatedand abolished,
and they openly taught that believers were not bound to make the moral law
the rule of their lives. What would have been sin in other men they counted to
be no sin in themselves.
From such Antinomianism as that may God deliver us. We are not under the
law as the method of salvation, but we delight to see the law in the hand of
Christ, and desire to obey the Lord in all things.
Others have been met with who have taught that Jesus mitigatedand softened
down the law, and they have in effectsaid that the perfectlaw of God was too
hard for imperfect beings, and therefore God has given us a milder and easier
rule. These tread dangerouslyupon the verge of terrible error, although we
believe that they are little aware of it. Alas, we have met with authors who
have gone much further than this, and have railed at the law. Oh, the hard
words that I have sometimes read againstthe holy law of God! How very
unlike to those which the apostle used when he said, “The law is holy, and the
commandment holy, and just, and good.” How different from the reverent
spirit which made him say,-“I delight in the law of God after the inward

39. man.” You know how David loved the law of God, and sang its praises all
through the longestofthe Psalms.
The heart of every real Christian is most reverent towards the law of the
Lord. It is perfect, nay, it is perfection itself. We believe that we shall never
have reachedperfection till we are perfectly conformed to it. A sanctification
which stops short of perfect conformity to the law cannot truthfully he called
perfect sanctification, forevery want of exactconformity to the perfectlaw is
sin. May the Spirit of God help us while, in imitation of our Lord Jesus, we
endeavorto magnify the law.
The Law Of God Must Be Perpetual. There is no abrogationof it, nor
amendment of it. It is not to be toned down or adjusted to our fallen
condition; but every one of the Lord’s righteous judgments abideth for ever.
I would urge three reasons whichwill establish this teaching.
In the first place our Lord Jesus declaresthat he did not come to abolishit.
His words are most express:“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or
the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” And Paul tells us with
regard to the gospel, “Do we then make void the law through faith? God
forbid: yea, we establish the law” (Ro 3:31-note). The gospelis the means of
the firm establishment and vindication of the law of God.
Jesus did not come to change the law, but he came to explain it, and that very
fact shows that it remains, for there is no need to explain that which is
abrogated. Upon one particular point in which there happened to be a little
ceremonialisminvolved, namely, the keeping of the Sabbath, our Lord
enlarged, and showedthat the Jewishidea was not the true one. The Pharisees

40. forbade even the doing of works of necessityand mercy, such as rubbing ears
of corn to satisfy hunger, and healing the sick. Our Lord Jesus showedthat it
was not at all according to the mind of God to forbid these things. In straining
over the letter, and carrying an outward observance to excess,they had
missed the spirit of the Sabbath law, which suggestedworks ofpiety such as
truly hallow the day. He showedthat Sabbatic rest was not mere inaction, and
he said, “My Fatherworkethhitherto, and I work.” He pointed to the priests
who labored hard at offering sacrifices,and said of them, “the priests in the
temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless.” Theywere doing divine
service, and were within the law. To meet the popular error he took care to do
some of his grandestmiracles upon the Sabbath-day; and though this excited
greatwrath againsthim, as though he were a law-breaker, yethe did it on
purpose that they might see that the Sabbath was made for man and not man
for the Sabbath, and that it is meant to be a day for doing that which honors
God and blesses men. O that men knew how to keepthe spiritual Sabbath by
a easing from all servile work, and from all work done for self, The rest of
faith is the true Sabbath, and the service of Godis the most acceptable
hallowing of the day. Oh that the day were wholly spent in serving God and
doing good! The sum of our Lord’s teaching was that works ofnecessity,
works of mercy, and works ofpiety are lawful on the Sabbath. He did explain
the law in that point and in others, yet that explanation did not alter the
command, but only removed the rust of tradition which had settledupon it.
By thus explaining the law he confirmed it; he could not have meant to abolish
it or he would not have needed to expound it.
In addition to explaining it the Masterwent further: he pointed out its
spiritual character. This the Jews had not observed. They thought, for
instance, that the command “Thoushalt not kill” simply forbade murder and
manslaughter: but the Savior showedthat anger without cause violates the
law, and that hard words and cursing, and all other displays of’ enmity and
malice, are forbidden by the commandment. They knew that they might not
commit adultery, but it did not enter into their minds that a lascivious desire
would be an offense againstthe precept till the Savior said, “He that looketh
upon a woman to lust after her committeth adultery with her already in his

41. heart.” He showedthat the thought of evil is sin, that an unclean imagination
pollutes the heart, that a wanton wish is guilt in the eyes of’ the MostHigh.
Assuredly this was no abrogationof law:it was a wonderful exhibition of its
far-reaching sovereigntyand of its searching character. The Pharisees fancied
that if they kept their hands, and their feet, and their tongues, all was done,
but Jesus showedthat thought, imagination, desire, memory, everything, must
be brought into subjection to the will of God, or else the law was not fulfilled.
What a searching and humbling doctrine is this! If the law of the Lord
reaches to the inward parts who among us can by nature abide its judgment?
Who can understand his errors? Cleanse thou me from secretfaults. The ten
commands are full of meaning-meaning which many seemto ignore. For
instance, many a man will allow in and around his house inattention to the
rules of health and sanitary precaution, but it does not occur to him that he is
trampling on the command,- “Thou shalt not kill,” yet this rule forbids our
doing anything which may cause injury to our neighbor’s health, and so
deprive him of life. Many a deadly manufactured article, many an ill-
ventilated shop, many a business with hours of excessive length, is a standing
breach of this command. Shall I say less ofdrinks, which lead so speedily to
disease anddeath, and crowd our cemeteries with untimely graves? So, too, in
reference to anotherprecept: some persons will repeat songs and stories
which are suggestive ofuncleanness,-Iwishthat this were not so common as it
is. Do they not know that an unchaste word, a double meaning, a sly hint of
lust all come under the command, “Thou shalt not commit adultery”? It is so
according to the teaching of our Lord Jesus. Oh, talk not to me about our
Lord’s having brought in a milder law because man could not keepthe
Decalogue, forhe has done nothing of the kind. “His fan is in his hand, and he
will thoroughly purge his floor.” “Who may abide the day of his coining? for
he is like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers’ soap.” Letus not dare to dream that
God had given us a perfect law which we poor creatures could not keep, and
that therefore he has correctedhis legislature, and sent his Son to put us
under a relaxed discipline. Nothing of the sort. The Lord Jesus Christ has, on
the contrary, shown how intimately the law surrounds and enters into our
inward parts, so as to convict us of sin within even if we seemclearwithout.
Ah me, this law is high; I cannot attain to it. It everywhere surrounds me; it
tracks me to my bed and my board; it follows my steps and marks my ways

42. whereverI may be. No moment does it ceaseto govern and demand
obedience. O God, I am everywhere condemned, for everywhere thy law
reveals to me my serious deviations from the way of righteousness andshows
me how far short I come of thy glory. Have thou pity on thy servant, for I fly
to the gospelwhich has done for me what the law could never do.
“To see the law by Christ fulfill’d,
And hear his pardoning voice,
Changes a slave into a child,
And duty into choice.”
Our Lord Jesus Christ, in addition to explaining the law and pointing out its
spiritual character, also unveiled its living essence, forwhen one askedhim
“Which is the greatcommandment in the law?” he said, “Thoushalt love the
Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and greatcommandment. And the secondis like unto it; Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the
law and the prophets.” In other words, he has told us, “All the law is fulfilled
in this: thou shalt love.” There is the pith and marrow of it. Does any man say
to me, “You see, then, instead of the ten commandments we have receivedthe
two commandments, and these are much easier.” I answerthat this reading of
the law is not in the leasteasier. Sucha remark implies a want of thought and
experience. Those two precepts comprehend the ten at their fullest extent, and
cannot be regardedas the erasure of a jot or tittle of them. Whatever
difficulties surround the ten commands are equally found in the two, which
are their sum and substance. If you love God with all your heart you must
keepthe first table; and if you love your neighbor as yourself you must keep
the secondtable. If any suppose that the law of love is an adaptation of the
moral law to man’s fallen condition they greatly err. I can only saythat the
supposedadaptation is no more adapted to us than the original law. If there
could be conceivedto be any difference in difficulty it might be easierto keep

43. the ten than the two; for if we go no deeper than tile letter, the two are the
more exacting, since they deal with the heart, and soul, and mind. The ten
commands mean all that the two express;but if we forgetthis, and only look
at the wording of them, I say, it is harder for a man to love God with all his
heart, with all his soul, with all his mind, and with all his strength, and his
neighbor as himself than it would be merely to abstain from killing, stealing,
and false witness. Christ has not, therefore, abrogatedorat all moderated the
law to meet our helplessness;he has left it in all its sublime perfection, as it
always must be left, and he has pointed out how deep are its foundations, how
elevatedare its heights, how measureless are its length and breadth. Like the
laws of the Medes and Persians, God’s commands cannot be altered; we are
savedby another method.
To show that he never meant to abrogate the law, our Lord Jesus has
embodied all its commands in his own life. In his own personthere was a
nature which was perfectly conformed to the law of God; and as was his
nature such was his life. He could say, “Which of you convinceth me of sin?”
and again“I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love.” I
may not saythat he was scrupulously careful to keepthe law: I will not put it
so, for there was no tendency in him to do otherwise:he was so perfectand
pure, so infinitely good, and so complete in his agreementand communion
with the Father, that he in all things carried out the Father’s will. The Father
said of him, “This is my belovedSon in whom I am well pleased;hear ye
him.” Point out, if you possibly can, any way in which Christ has violated the
law or left it unfulfilled. There was never an unclean thought or rebellious
desire in his soul; he had nothing to regret or to retract: it could not be that he
should err. He was thrice tempted in the wilderness, and the enemy had the
impertinence even to suggestidolatry, but he instantly overthrew the
adversary. The prince of this world came to him, but he found nothing in him.
“My dear Redeemerand my Lord,
I read my duty in thy Word;

44. But in thy life the law appears
Drawn out in living characters.”
Now, if that law had been too high and too hard, Christ would not have
exhibited it in his life, but as our exemplar he would have set forth that milder
form of law which it is supposedby some theologians he came to introduce.
Inasmuch as our Leaderand Exemplar has exhibited to us in his life a perfect
obedience to the sacredcommands in their undiminished grandeur, I gather
that he means it to be the model of our conversation. Our Lord has not taken
off a single point or pinnacle from that np-towering alp of perfection. He said
at the first, “Lo, I come:in the volume of’ the book it is written of me, I
delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is within my heart.” and well
has he justified the writing of the volume of the book. “Godsent forth his Son,
made of a woman, made under the law”;and being for our sakesunder the
law he obeyed it to the full, so that now “Christ is the end of the law for
righteousness to everyone that believeth.”
Once more, that the Masterdid not come to alter the law is clear, because
after having embodied it in his life he willingly gave himself up to bear its
penalty, though he had never brokenit, bearing the penalty for us, even as it
is written, “Christhath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a
curse for us.” “All we like sheephave gone astray, we have turned every one
to his own way, and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” If the
law had demanded more of us than it ought to have done, would the Lord
Jesus have rendered to it the penalty which resulted from its too severe
demands? I am sure he would not. But because the law askedonly what it
ought to ask-namely perfect obedience;and exactedof the transgressoronly
what it ought to exact, namely, death, as the penalty for sin,-death under
divine wrath, therefore the Savior went to the tree, and there bore our sins
and purged them once for all. He was crushedbeneath the load of our guilt,
and cried, “My soulis exceeding sorrowful, evenunto death,” and at last
when he had borne-

45. “All that incarnate God could bear,
With strength enough, but none to spare,”
he bowed his head and said, “It is finished.” Our Lord Jesus Christ gave a
greatervindication to the law by dying, because it had been broken, than all
the lostin hell can ever give by their miseries. for their suffering is never
complete, their debt is never paid; but he has borne all that was due from his
people, and the law is defrauded of nothing. By his death he has vindicated the
honor of God’s moral government, and made it just for him to be merciful.
When the lawgiverhimself submits to the law, when the sovereignhimself
bears the extreme penalty of that law, then is the justice of God set upon such
a glorious high throne that all admiring worlds must wonder at it. If therefore
it is clearly proven that Jesus was obedientto the law, even to the extent of
death, he certainly did not come to abolish or abrogate it; and if he did not
remove it, who can do so? If he declares thathe came to establishit, who shall
overthrow it?
But, secondly, the law of God must be perpetual from its very nature, for does
it not strike you the moment you think of it that right must always be right,
truth must always be true, and purity must always be purity? Before the ten
commandments were published at Sinai there was still that same law of right
and wrong laid upon men by the necessityof their being God’s creatures.
Right was always right before a single command had been committed to
words. When Adam was in the gardenit was always right that he should love
his Maker, and it would always have been wrong that he should have been at
cross-purposeswith his God; and it does not matter what happens in this
world, or what changes take place in the universe, it never can be right to lie,
or to commit adultery, or murder, or theft, or to worship an idol God. I will
not saythat the principles of right and wrong are as absolutelyself-existentas
God, but I do saythat I cannot graspthe idea of Godhimself as existing apart

46. from his being always holy and always true; so that the very idea of right and
wrong seems to me to be necessarilypermanent, and cannot possibly be
shifted. You cannot bring right down to a lowerlevel; it must be where it
always is: right is right eternally, and cannot be wrong. You cannot lift up
wrong and make it somewhatright; it must be wrong while the world
standeth. Heaven and earth may pass away, but not the smallestletter or
accentof the moral law can possibly change. In spirit the law is eternal.
Suppose for a moment that it were possible to temper and tone down the law,
wherein would it be? I confess I do not know and cannotimagine. If it be
perfectly holy, how canit be alteredexcept by being made imperfect. Would
you wish for that? Could you worship the God of an imperfect law? Can it
ever be true that God, by way of favoring us, has put us under an imperfect
law? Would that be a blessing or a curse? It is said by some that man cannot
keepa perfect law, and God does not demand that he should. Certain modern
theologians have taught this, 1 hope, by inadvertence. Has God issuedan
imperfect law? It is the first imperfect thing I ever heard of his making. Does
it come to this that, after all, the gospelis a proclamationthat God is going to
be satisfiedwith obedience to a mutilated law? Godforbid. I say, better that
we perish than that his perfect law perish. Terrible as it is, it lies at the
foundation of the peace ofthe universe. and must be honored at all hazards.
That gone, all goes. Whenthe powerof the Holy Ghostconvinced me of sin I
felt such a solemnawe of the law of God, that I remember well, when I lay
crashedbeneath it as a condemned sinner, I yet admired and glorified the law.
I could not have wished that perfect law to be altered for me. Ratherdid I feel
that, if my soul were sent to the lowesthell, yet God was to be extolled for his
justice and his law held in honor for its perfectness. Iwould not have had it
altered even to save my soul. Brethren, the law of the Lord must stand, for it
is perfect, and therefore has in it no element of decayor change.
The law of God is no more than God might most righteously ask ofus. If God
were about to give us a more tolerant law, it would be an admission on his

47. part that he askedtoo much at first. Can that be supposed? Was there, after
all, some justification for the statement of the wickedand slothful servant
when he said, “I feared thee, because thou art an austere man”? It cannotbe.
For God to alter his law would be an admission that he made a mistake at
first, that he put poor imperfect man (we are often hearing that said) under
too rigorous a regime, and therefore he is now prepared to abate his claims,
and make them more reasonable. It has been saidthat man’s moral inability
to keepthe perfectlaw exempts him from the duty of doing so. This is very
specious, but it is utterly false. Man’s inability is not of the kind which
removes responsibility: it is moral, not physical. Never fall into the error that
moral inability will be an excuse for sin. What, when a man becomes sucha
liar that he cannotspeak the truth, is he thereby exempted from the duty of
truthfulness? If your servantowes you a day’s labor, is he free from the duty
because he has made himself so drunk that he cannot serve you? Is a man
freed from a debt by the fact that he has squandered the money, and therefore
cannot pay it? Is a lustful man free to indulge his passions becausehe cannot
understand the beauty of chastity? This is dangerous doctrine. The law is a
just one, and man is bound by it though his sin has rendered him incapable of
doing so.
The law moreover demands no more than is goodfor us. There is not a single
commandment of God’s law but what is meant to be a kind of danger signal
such as we put up upon the ice when it is too thin to bear. Eachcommandment
does as it were say to us, “Dangerous”It is never for a man’s goodto do what
God forbids him; it is never for man’s real and ultimate happiness to leave
undone anything that God commands him. The wisestdirections for spiritual
health, and for the avoidance of evil, are those directions which are given us
concerning right and wrong in the law of God. Therefore it is not possible that
there should be any alterationthereof, for it would not be for our good.
I should like to sayto any brother who thinks that God has put us under an
altered rule: “Which particular part of the law is it that God has relaxed?”

48. Which preceptdo you feelfree to break? Are you delivered from the
command which forbids stealing? My dear sir, you may be a capital
theologian, but I should lock up my spoons when you call at my house. Is it the
command about adultery which you think is removed? Then I could not
recommend your being admitted into any decent society. Is the law as to
killing softeneddown? Then I had rather have your room than your company.
Which law is it that God has exempted you from? That law of worshipping
him only? Do you propose to have another God? Do you intend to make
graven images? The factis that when we come to detail we cannot afford to
lose a single link of this wonderful goldenchain, which is perfectin every part
as well as perfect as a whole. The law is absolutely complete, and you can
neither add to it nor take from it. “Forwhosoevershallkeepthe whole law,
and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. Forhe that said, Do not commit
adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou
kill, thou art become a transgressorofthe law.” If, then, no part of it can be
takendown, it must stand, and stand for ever.
A third reasonI will give why the law must be perpetual is that to suppose it
altered is most dangerous. To take awayfrom the law its perpetuity is first of
all to take awayfrom it its power to convince of sin. Is it so, that I, being an
imperfect creature, am not expectedto keepa perfectlaw? Then it follows
that I do not sin when I break the law; and if all that is required of me is that I
am to do according to the best of my knowledge and ability, then I have a very
convenient rule indeed, and most men will take care to adjust it so as to give
themselves as much latitude as possible. By removing the law you have done
awaywith sin, for sin is the transgressionof the law, and where there is no law
there is no transgression. Whenyou have done awaywith sin you may as well
have done awaywith the Saviorand with salvation, for they are by no means
needful. When you have reduced sin to a minimum, what need is there of that
greatand glorious salvationwhich Jesus Christhas come to bring into the
world? Brethren, we must have none of this: it is evidently a way of mischief.

49. By lowering the law you weakenits powerin the hands of God as a convincer
of sin. “By the law is the knowledge ofsin.” It is the looking-glasswhichshows
us our spots, and that is a most useful thing, though nothing but the gospelcan
washthem away.
“My hopes of heavenwere firm and bright,
But since the precept came
With a convincing powerand light, I find how vile I am.
“My guilt appear’d but small before,
Till terribly I saw How perfect, holy, just, and pure,
Was thine eternal law.
“Then felt my soul the heavy load,
My sins reviv’d again,
I had provok’d a dreadful God,
And all my hopes were slain.”
It is only a pure and perfect law that the Holy Spirit can use in order to show
to us our depravity and sinfulness. Lowerthe law and you dim the light by
which man perceives his guilt. This is a very serious loss to the sinner rather
than a gain, for it lessens the likelihood of his convictionand conversion.
You have also takenawayfrom the law its powerto shut us up to the faith of
Christ. What is the law of God for? For us to keepin order to be savedby it?

50. Not at all. It is sent in order to show us that we cannotbe savedby works, and
to shut us up to be saved by grace;but if you make out that the law is altered
so that a man can keepit, you have left him his old legalhope, and he is sure
to cling to it. You need a perfect law that shuts man right up to hopelessness
apart from Jesus, puts him into an iron cage and locks him up, and offers him
no escape but by faith in Jesus;then he begins to cry, “Lord, save me by
grace, forI perceive that I cannot be savedby my own works.” This is how
Paul describes it to the Galatians:“The Scripture hath concluded all under
sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that
believe. 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
schoolmasterto bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.” I
say you have deprived the gospelof its ablest auxiliary when you have set
aside the law. You have takenawayfrom it the schoolmasterthatis to bring
men to Christ. No, it must stand, and stand in all its terrors, to drive men
awayfrom self-righteousnessand constrainthem to fly to Christ. They will
never acceptgrace till they tremble before a just and holy law; therefore the
law serves a most necessaryand blessedpurpose, and it must not be removed
from its place.
To alter the law is to leave us without any law at all. A sliding-scale of duty is
an immoral invention, fatal to the principles of law. If eachman is to be
acceptedbecausehe does his best, we are all doing our best. Is there anybody
that is not? If we take their words for it, all our fellow-men are doing as well
as they can, considering their imperfect natures. Even the harlot in the streets
has some righteousness,-she is not quite so far gone as others. Have you never
heard of the bandit who committed many murders, but who felt that he had
been doing his best because he never killed anybody on a Friday? Self-
righteousness builds itself a nest even in the worstcharacter. This is the man’s
talk:- “Really, if you knew me, you would say, I have been a goodfellow to do
as well as I have. Considerwhat a poor, fallen creature I am; what strong
passions were born in me; what temptations to vice besetme, and you will not
blame me much. After all, I dare say God is as satisfiedwith me as with many
who are a great dealbetter, because Ihad so few advantages.”Yes, you have

51. shifted the standard, and every man will now do that which is right in his own
eyes and claim to be doing his best. If you shift the standard pound weight or
the bushel measure, you will certainly never getfull weight or measurement
again. There will be no standard to go by, and eachman will do his best with
his ownpounds and bushels. If the standard be tampered with you have taken
awaythe foundation upon which trade is conducted; and it is the same in soul
matters,-abolishthe best rule that ever canbe, even God’s own law, and there
is no rule left worthy of the name. What a fine opening this leaves for vain
glory. No wonder that men talk of perfect sanctificationif the law has been
lowered. There is nothing at all remarkable in our getting up to the rule if it is
conveniently loweredfor us. I believe I shall be perfectly sanctifiedwhen I
keepGod’s law without omissionor transgression, but not till then. If any
man says that he is perfectly sanctified because he has come up to a modified
law of his own, I am glad to know what he means, for I have no longer any
discussionwith him: I see nothing wonderful in his attainment. Sin is my want
of conformity to the law of God, and until we are perfectly conformed to that
law in all its spiritual length and breadth it is idle for us to talk about perfect
sanctification:no man is perfectly clean till he accepts absolute purity as the
standard by which he is to be judged. So long as there is in us any coming
short of the perfect law we are not perfect. What a humbling truth this is! The
law shall not pass away, but it must be fulfilled. This truth must be
maintained, for if it goes, our tacklings are loose,we cannotwell strengthen
the mast; the ship goes all to pieces;she becomes a total wreck. The gospel
itself would be destroyedcould you destroy the law. To tamper with the law is
to trifle with the gospel. “Tillheaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall
in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (The Perpetuity of the Law)
BUT TO FULFILL: alla plerosai. (AAN)
Mt 3:15; Ps 40:6, 7, 8; Isaiah 42:21;Romans 8:4; Galatians 4:4,5;Colossians
2:16,17;Hebrews 10:3-12
Romans 5 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries

52. Matthew 5:17 Christ and the Law, Part 1 - John MacArthur
Matthew 5:18 Christ and the Law, Part 2 - John MacArthur
NOT ABOLITION
BUT FULFILLMENT
But to fulfill - Jesus came not as an Abrogatorbut as a Fulfiller of the Law.
He fulfills the Law by realizing in theory and practice the ideal to which the
OT Law and institutions all pointed. He was the Substance and very Form of
which the Law was only a pale or weak shadow (Col2:17+), Heb 10:1+).
Paul explains Jesus fulfilled the Law "so that the requirement of the Law
might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according
to the Spirit." (Romans 8:4+)
Fulfill (4137)(pleroo [word study] from pleres = full) be completely filled
indicating a completedstate. It means to fill out or to expand. Here pleroo
means to make complete in every particular. To complete the design. To fill
up what was predicted. To accomplishwhat was intended in the Old
Testament.
Pleroo - 86x in 86v in the NAS -Matt 1:22; 2:15, 17, 23;3:15; 4:14; 5:17; 8:17;
12:17;13:35, 48; 21:4; 23:32; 26:54, 56;27:9; Mark 1:15; 14:49;Luke 1:20;
2:40; 3:5; 4:21; 7:1; 9:31; 21:24;22:16; 24:44;John 3:29; 7:8; 12:3, 38;13:18;
15:11, 25;16:6, 24; 17:12f;18:9, 32;19:24, 36; Acts 1:16; 2:2, 28; 3:18; 5:3,
28; 7:23, 30; 9:23; 12:25;13:25, 27, 52; 14:26;19:21; 24:27;Rom 1:29; 8:4;
13:8; 15:13f, 19; 2 Cor 7:4; 10:6; Gal5:14; Eph 1:23; 3:19; 4:10; 5:18; Phil
1:11; 2:2; 4:18f; Col 1:9, 25; 2:10; 4:17; 2 Thess 1:11;2 Tim 1:4; Jas 2:23; 1
John 1:4; 2 John 1:12; Rev 3:2; 6:11

53. J C Ryle wrote that…The Old Testamentis the Gospelin the bud; the New
Testamentis the Gospelin full flavor. The Old Testamentis the Gospelin the
blade; the New Testamentis the Gospelin full ear.
M De Haan wrote that "Jesus did not DESTROYthe law, but He fulfilled it.
When He arose, He proved that He had paid the death penalty of that Law.
The Law has not failed—but man failed under the Law. The Law is still as
perfect as ever, still as “just” as ever, and will condemn the sinner. The only
hope lies in abandoning all hope of saving one’s self, and casting one’s selfon
the Grace ofGod, and Godalone. We repeat, Jesus did not destroythe Law. It
remains and ever will remain, the perfect demand of a righteous God for all
who would save themselves. Since the sinner cannot keepit, the Law
condemns him. But Christ fulfilled all its demands, and so while the Law is
not dead, the believer is dead to the Law, and alive unto God. (Studies in
Galatians)
John Phillips - "The Jews counted613 separate edicts in the Mosaic law
(What are the 613 commandments in the Old TestamentLaw?)and there
never was a single moment when the Lord Jesus did not absolutelyfulfill in
every detail every commandment. As a baby and as a boy, as a teenagerand
in the prime of life, at home, at school, atwork, at play, as a son and as a
brother, as a neighbor and as a friend, as a village carpenter, as an itinerant
preacher, in secretand in public, when surrounded by family and friends and
when confronted by formidable foes—atall times, in all places, in all ways, He
kept the law of God. He kept it in letter and in spirit. He kept the law in its
injunctions and in its intentions. He kept it because it was His nature to keep
it. He would never dream of not keeping it. It was His Father's will and Jesus
always did those things that please the Father(see John 8:29). (Phillips, John:
Exploring Matthew:An ExpositoryCommentary)

54. Jesus was the "full flavor" and "full ear" to use Ryle's terms. As Mt 5:21-48
clearly shows Jesus intentionwas not to abolish but to explain fully the
original intent of the Law, which the Jews hadsadly managedto miss for
some 14 centuries (the Old Covenant having been given to Israelat Mt Sinai
about 1440BC). The religious leaders suchas the Phariseesthought the Law
was not sufficient and so added many oral traditions. (or tradition -- Mt 15:2,
3, 6; Mk 7:3, 5, 8, 9, 13;1Co 11:2; Gal 1:14; Col 2:8; 2Th 2:15; 3:6) As an
aside, although the majority of Israelfailed attain God's perfect righteousness
(i.e., most of Israelin the OT was not savedas we use the term today - cp Ro
2:27, 28, 29-note), not all misunderstood and misused the Law, for God had
always preserveda righteous remnant in every generation. And so here in the
Sermon on the Mount, Jesus had no desire to annul any of the Law nor to add
to it.
As David explained in Psalm19:7 "the Law of the LORD is perfect"
(Spurgeon's note) or complete in all its parts and in need of nothing to be
added to make it more complete (cp Ro 7:12-note). Jesus, the Word of God
(John 1:1, 14), the very personificationof the living and active word, came to
clarify its true meaning, the meaning God had originally intended.
Spurgeonin his sermon The Perpetuity of the Law expounds 3 ways that
Christ fulfilled the Law…
(1)
First, as I have already said, the law is fulfilled in the matchless sacrifice of
Jesus Christ.
If a man has broken a law, what does the law do with him? It says,

55. “I must be honored. You have broken my command which was sanctionedby
the penalty of death. Inasmuch as you did not honor me by obedience, but
dishonored me by transgression, you must die.”
Our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the greatcovenantrepresentative of his people,
their secondAdam, stoodforward on the behalf of all who are in Him, and
presentedHimself as a victim to divine justice. Since His people were guilty of
death, He, as their Covenant Head, came under death, in their place and
stead. It was a glorious thing that such representative death was possible, and
it was only so because ofthe original constitution of the race as springing from
a common father, and placed under a single head. Inasmuch as our fall was by
one Adam, it was possible for us to be raisedby another Adam.
“As in Adam all died, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” (1Cor 15:22)
It became possible for God, upon the principle of representation, to allow of
substitution.
Our first fall was not by our personalfault, but through the failure of our
representative;and now in comes our secondand grander representative, the
Son of God, and He sets us free, not by our honoring the law, but by His doing
so. He came under the law by His birth, and being found as a man loadedwith
the guilt of all His people, He was visited with its penalty.
The law lifts its bloody axe, and it smites our glorious Head that we may go
free. It is the Son of God that keeps the law by dying, the just for the unjust.

56. “The soul that sins, it shall die,”
There is death demanded, and in Christ death is presented. Life for life is
rendered: an infinitely precious life instead of the poor lives of men. Jesus has
died, and so the law has been fulfilled by the endurance of its penalty, and
being fulfilled, its power to condemn and punish the believer has passedaway.
(2)
Secondly, the law has been fulfilled againfor us by Christ in His life.
I have already gone over this, but I want to establishyou in it. Jesus Christ as
our Head and Representative came into the world for the double purpose of
bearing the penalty and at the same time keeping the law.
One of his main designs in coming to earth was “to bring in perfect
righteousness.”
“As by the disobedience ofone many were made sinners, so by the
righteousness ofone shall many be made righteous.” (see note Romans 5:19)
The law requires a perfectlife, and he that believeth in Jesus Christ presents
to the law a perfect life, which he has made his ownby faith. It is not his own
life, but Christ is made of God unto us righteousness, evento us who are one
with him.

57. “Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”
(see note Romans 10:4)
That which Jesus did is counted as though we did it, and because He was
righteous God sees us in Him and counts us righteous upon the principle of
substitution and representation.
Oh, how blessedit is to put on this robe and to wearit, and so to stand before
the MostHigh in a better righteousness than ever His law demanded, for that
demanded the perfect righteousness ofa creature, but we put on the absolute
righteousness ofthe CreatorHimself:, and what can the law ask more? It is
written,
“In His (Messiah's)days Judah shall be saved, and Israelshall dwell safely,
and this is tile name wherewith he shall be called-The Lord our
righteousness.”(Jer23:6)
“The Lord is well pleasedfor his righteousness’sake:He will magnify the law
and make it honorable.” (Isaiah42:21)
(3)
Ay, but that is not all. The law has to be fulfilled in us personallyin a spiritual
and gospelsense.
“Well,” sayyou, “but how can that be?”