Jesus fulfilled the law – Matthew 5:17 – Also abolished?

Deutsch

The verse Matthew 5:17 is one of the most frequently cited statements to justify a supposed abolition of God’s laws. It is interpreted simply: fulfillment means abolition. This is arbitrary and, moreover, completely paradoxical. The very next verse, 18, exposes this error.

Usually when the 4th commandment comes into play

“Jesus fulfilled the law” and therefore the law was abolished, according to a very popular theory. Reason enough to refute this claim. What’s “strange” is that this argument is rarely, if ever, cited when the offenses of “false godliness, idolatry, dishonoring God, rebellion against parents, murder, adultery, theft, slander, and envy” come into play. These are offenses that are generally considered morally reprehensible. These actions also violate God’s commandments. Specifically, the list of offenses concerns violations of commandments 1-10, except for commandment 4 (the true 10 commandments – Info).

However, when the Fourth Commandment is explicitly addressed, namely the commandment “Remember the Sabbath,” the defensive argument about “fulfilling and thus abolishing the law” is very likely to be raised. As strange as it may sound, this almost always happens. Other evasive maneuvers classify the Fourth Commandment as a ceremonial law that was actually abolished. This also defies all logic, since not 9 out of 10, but 10 out of 10 commandments were written by God himself on the two stone tablets, and both tablets were also kept in the Ark of the Covenant.

The “Laws of Moses,” i.e., the ceremonial laws, were dictated by God, but were written down by Moses, and these statutes were kept next to the Ark of the Covenant (Info).

Isolated verse 17 from Matthew 5

The fulfillment of the laws through Jesus Christ is, in each case, simply interpreted as a repeal, and this is repeatedly the case when the Sabbath commandment is specifically addressed (Info). “No, the repeal did not occur through dissolution, but through fulfillment,” is the attempt at justification. The single verse Matthew 5:17 is helpful in this regard:
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.“

Well, by the same logic, a civil servant will find himself without obligations and thus without work the next day if he fulfills his duty according to the law today. By fulfilling his duty, he has, after all, abolished the law. It doesn’t sound convincing, but given God’s laws, this is quite natural.

Also read verses 18 to 20!

One cannot help wondering whether those who simply cite Matthew 5:17 for their justification have ever read even a few verses beyond it. Verse 18 states:
“For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.“

Doesn’t a discrepancy already become apparent at this point? In verse 17, the laws are supposedly abolished through fulfillment, but in verse 18, the laws are declared to be imperishable as long as heaven and earth exist and everything hasn’t happened yet. A glance up and down already reveals that heaven and earth still exist. Furthermore, the most important of all future events, the return of Jesus Christ, hasn’t happened yet. Thus, “everything hasn’t happened yet.” The simple conclusion: the law still exists, not changed by a single letter, not even a single stroke.

Verse 19

It’s a mystery how this obvious problem is solved in the minds of those who talk about abolishing God’s laws. Especially the 4th Commandment. But it goes even further. The very next verse, 19, warns emphatically:
“Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.“

Verse 20

In fact, after the question about the contradiction in verse 18 has been simply ignored and left unanswered, one receives the answer to verse 19 that it doesn’t really matter whether one is a privileged person in heaven or just a “doorman.” “Then I’ll just be called the least in heaven, no matter.” What is that? Cognitive dissonance? At this point, too, the “supporter of abolished law” has a problem of understanding, which could be answered immediately if he or she can bring themselves to read verse 20 as well:
“For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.“

In plain English: Being called the least in the kingdom of heaven does not necessarily mean that one is in heaven oneself. Those present in the kingdom of heaven will refer to the outsider as “least.” Period. That’s exactly what verse 20 makes clear.

Caught cold

When Jesus Christ made this statement about the scribes and Pharisees, the listeners’ jaws must have dropped to the floor. These “heads of the law and the Scriptures” were the spiritual leaders, highly respected and honored. The only ones capable of understanding, interpreting, and living the Scriptures correctly. Incidentally, this is how the Pharisees and legalists behaved, too. Jesus Christ, however, exposed them all as liars and hypocrites (Matthew 23).

Imagine someone in Italy, Spain, or even a traditional village in Upper Bavaria, surrounded by devout, culture-loving, traditional, and deeply superstitious Catholics, and uttering the sentence:
“For I say to you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the Pope and the other bishops, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven!“

With polemical spice: This sentence, possibly even during a Roman Catholic procession, should only be shouted in a vehicle with the engine already running at high revs and the car in gear.

At the very least, the effect of this statement about the Pharisees and scribes on the crowd listening at that time must have been very similar.

God’s laws stand – forever!

No matter how you twist and turn it, it doesn’t change the fact that Matthew 5, verse 17, and verse 18 apparently contradict each other. It doesn’t help to simply ignore this fact because it doesn’t suit your own agenda. In fact, however, there is no contradiction at all, because the “fulfillment of the law” simply means “observance of the law.” With the death of Jesus Christ on the cross, the ceremonial laws were abolished, but not the eternal and just Ten Commandments of God. “Eternal” means “forever,” meaning before any conceivable time, today, and in any conceivable future.

Psalm 119

Psalm 119 can certainly be called THE psalm for emphasizing the law of God. It contains the following statements about the law (10 Commandments):

• Verse 1: “ALEPH. Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the LORD.”
• Verse 18: “Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law.“
• Verse 29: “Remove from me the way of lying: and grant me thy law graciously.“
• Verse 34: “Give me understanding, and I shall keep thy law; yea, I shall observe it with my whole heart.“
• Verse 44: “So shall I keep thy law continually for ever and ever.“
• Verse 51: “The proud have had me greatly in derision: yet have I not declined from thy law.“
• Verse 53: “Horror hath taken hold upon me because of the wicked that forsake thy law.“
• Verse 55: “I have remembered thy name, O LORD, in the night, and have kept thy law.“
• Verse 61: “The bands of the wicked have robbed me: but I have not forgotten thy law.“
• Verse 70: “Their heart is as fat as grease; but I delight in thy law.“
• Verse 72: “The law of thy mouth is better unto me than thousands of gold and silver.“
• Verse 77: “Let thy tender mercies come unto me, that I may live: for thy law is my delight.“
• Verse 85: “The proud have digged pits for me, which are not after thy law.“
• Verse 92: “Unless thy law had been my delights, I should then have perished in mine affliction.“
• Verse 97: “O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day.“
• Verse 109: “My soul is continually in my hand: yet do I not forget thy law.“
• Verse 113: “I hate vain thoughts: but thy law do I love.“
• Verse 126: “It is time for thee, LORD, to work: for they have made void thy law.“
• Verse 136: “Rivers of waters run down mine eyes, because they keep not thy law.“
• Verse 142: “Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth.“
• Verse 150: “They draw nigh that follow after mischief: they are far from thy law.“
• Verse 153: “Consider mine affliction, and deliver me: for I do not forget thy law.“
• Verse 163: “I hate and abhor lying: but thy law do I love.“
• Verse 165: “Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them.“
• Verse 174: “I have longed for thy salvation, O LORD; and thy law is my delight.“

Unwillingness to obey

As paradoxical as the statements of those who despise God’s laws may sound, the actual abolition of the law would be just as paradoxical (Info). The entire gospel would have lost its meaning with the crucifixion of Jesus. And this not only from that point on, but also retroactively to the first Fall.

There is no longer any law, but we live only under grace, is similar nonsense (Info). This also applies to the claim that the law (10 Commandments) was only introduced at Mount Sinai and applied exclusively to the people of Israel (Info).

The excuses for not obeying God are almost inexhaustible, almost imaginative. A future kingdom under Jesus Christ, but all without any law? “Do what thou wilt! That shall be the whole of the law!” is the slogan of a Satanist, particularly popular in the music scene, Aleister Crowley. This message is directly or indirectly contained in many of the lyrics of these virtually deified “superstars” and is clearly bearing fruit (Info).

The first three lies of the serpent in the Garden of Eden can even be found very concretely and directly in the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church as official doctrine (Info). This is only a very, very small distance from the philosophies of Aleister Crowley.

Bible verses from King James Version (1611)