The relationship between law and gospel remains something of a conundrum for biblical scholarship. Matthew 5:17, and in particular what is meant by Jesus’ having come to fulfil the law and the prophets, contributes significantly to this ongoing discussion. What precisely is meant by ‘to fulfil the law and the prophets’ is an exegetical enigma. Utilising an eclectic array of methods, including literary, historical and theological approaches, this article attempts to articulate the nature of fulfilment in Matthew 5:17. In addition to arguments made on the basis of historical-critical exegesis, including the discussion of the nature of πληρóω in Matthew's Gospel, the sense in which the law prophesies and the contribution of the so-called antitheses of 5:21–48, we argue that the biblical-theological theme of the Kingdom of God clarifies a salvation-historical reading of Matthew 5:17. When it is said that Jesus has come to fulfil the law and the prophets, an eschatological or salvation-historical reading shows that what the law pointed towards has arrived in the teaching and ministry of Jesus. A biblical-theological reading of the Kingdom of God helps us, however, to add a measure of precision to this statement. Jesus fulfils the law and the prophets by bringing into being what was anticipated. The law and prophets anticipated the arrival of the Kingdom of God. Fulfilment, then, should be construed in terms of this motif. Jesus fulfils the law and the prophets by inaugurating the Kingdom of God to which they pointed. This renders discussion over whether Jesus fulfils the law and the prophets through either his teaching or his activity unnecessary, since the Kingdom of God is inaugurated through both.
I was introduced to the law and gospel debate some years ago when reading, of all things, a newspaper comic. In this strip, the renowned South African political cartoonist, Zapiro, depicts the minister of the African Christian Democratic Party, declaring that homosexual marriage runs contrary to God's Word (Shapiro
Apparently Zapiro's point is that the Bible contains many laws that we can no longer keep. I do not wish to make any point from this strip other than to underscore the practical relevance of how we understand the law's continuity and discontinuity, not least in 21st century South African ethics.
In the world of biblical studies, this discussion continues in every field: the Old Testament's view of the law, Paul's view of the law, and Jesus’ view of the law. Regarding the latter, Meier (
When Matthew's view of the law is examined, one finds similar diversity. Snodgrass (
Two developments in the world of biblical studies over recent decades need to be brought to bear on the discussion of the meaning of πληρóω: the advance of both literary approaches and biblical theology. In addition to regular historical critical exegesis, both have bearing on the present question and may aid one in understanding more precisely what it means to say that Jesus fulfils the law. This article begins by examining some previous contributions to understanding Matthew 5:17, and then proceeds to literary, historical-grammatical and theological considerations.
A great deal has been written on πληρóω over the last 100 years and no attempt is made to summarise it all.
Scholars such as Wenham (
Another view of πληρóω, espoused by Luz (
A third view understands ‘to fulfil’ to be referring to Jesus as the one who brings out the intended meaning of the law. This is the view put forward by Hagner (
A related but somewhat nuanced version of this view has recently been put forward by Nolland (
Westerholm (
Many scholars, following Banks (
Space forbids an evaluation each of these views here. This article finds the fifth view, namely that the law and prophets are fulfilled through the realisation of what was anticipated, to be the most satisfying overall, whilst not precluding other senses. However, since there is still no consensus on the matter, it is worth reinvestigating the evidence. This will be done by bringing literary, exegetical and biblical-theological considerations to bear on the interpretation of ‘fulfilment’.
Many interpretations of 5:17 depend on a particular interpretation of the antitheses of 5:21–48, since they illustrate the nature of the fulfilment Jesus brings. These contrasts are generally understood in one of three ways: firstly, Jesus is stating the true intention or interpretation of the law (cf. Hagner
How does this understanding of the antitheses bear on our interpretation of 5:17:
Since the antitheses point to the authority of Jesus, it is to him that the disciples have to look for a definitive statement of the law.
Jesus’ teaching does not oppose the law; rather ‘fulfilment’ suggests that Jesus’ demands surpass the demands of Torah without contradicting it (Davies & Allison
A fulfilled law is exhibited by an inward righteousness that exemplifies God's character and loves others; this is righteousness that exceeds the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees.
Frank Thielman (
Jesus’ teaching replaces the standing command with the goal to which it pointed. If obeyed, Jesus’ teaching would make the Mosaic legislation unnecessary. This is how the law is fulfilled. Thielman has made a helpful contribution towards understanding the relationship between πληρóω in its eschatological sense and the antitheses. If the antitheses represent the ethical goal to which the law pointed, it is likely that πληρóω in 5:17 ought to be understood correspondingly.
It is generally agreed that the Kingdom of God was at the centre of Jesus’ message and ministry (cf. Farmer Most were hoping, some fervently, for a new turn in Israel's fortunes. If there is a one creator god … then this god must act sooner or later to restore (Israel's) fortunes. Israel is still in a state of ‘exile’, and this must be put right. (p. 281)
For Wright (
The concept of the Kingdom of God or heaven
This context of the dawning of God's reign in the person and ministry of Jesus is significant for understanding of Matthew 5:17, because it makes interpretations to the effect that the law is merely ‘established’ unlikely. There has been a dramatic shift in the history of God's dealings with his people; a shift that has implications for the law and the prophets. When considered in this light, a salvation-historical explanation of ‘fulfil’ in Matthew 5:17 makes the most sense of the larger story within which Matthew places Jesus.
One final context in which to evaluate the various ways πληρóω in 5:17 has been understood is Matthew's concept of ‘fulfilment’. The use of the verb πληρóω is characteristic of Matthew's Gospel, being employed no fewer than 16 times (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), most of which are unique to Matthew. These and other considerations have led France (
Three things may be said about Matthew's use of ‘fulfilment’ language. Firstly, when Matthew records that what a certain prophet said was fulfilled, he is probably referring to the culmination of a pattern represented by a certain event in the past (cf. Turner
It is necessary to focus particularly on the passage as it stands in 5:17–20.
What one finds in 5:17–20 are the general principles, which are then illustrated by the antitheses of 5:21–48 (France
The inclusion of ‘the prophets’ alongside the law is significant, especially since it is the law that takes centre stage throughout the rest of the passage.
Arndt, Danker and Bauer (
Therefore, it is to the context that one must turn. As discussed above, Matthew's formula quotations provide what might be called a salvation-historical understanding of πληρóω in which Matthew sees an event, which transpired in the Old Testament as it has reached its historical climax in Jesus. In this sense, then, ‘fulfil’ means that the trajectory, which was set in motion by a particular Old Testament event, has now reached its conclusion. Furthermore, the use in Matthew 3:15 – also in the aorist active infinitive – probably refers to Jesus’ fulfilling of prophecy, since prophecy is in focus in virtually all of Matthew's other references to πληρóω. Moreover, the allusions to the Old Testament imply the realisation of scriptural hopes (cf. Ps 2:7; Is 42:1; Davies & Allison
In what sense does the law prophesy? Matthew 11:13 shows that Matthew certainly conceived of both prophets and law as having prophetic functions. Here salvation history is in view. What the Jewish scriptures – the law and the prophets – pointed toward has arrived in the ministry of John the Baptist. The sense in 5:17 is similar: not only the prophets, but also the law prophesied or pointed forward to the fuller revelation of God's will that came with the time of fulfilment in Jesus’ ministry (France
This section has considered several factors from the literary context and surveyed some of the standard arguments for a prophetic reading of Matthew 5:17. Finally, it needs to be considered how biblical theology may be brought to bear on this interpretation.
Despite resistance to the idea of a unified biblical theology (cf. Bartholomew
One theme that has immerged consistently as central to the biblical narrative is that of the Kingdom of God.
Several biblical theologians have paid attention to the prominence of this theme from a biblical theological perspective. Goldsworthy (
What bearing, if any, does this have on Matthew 5:17? Above it was shown that many studies have recognised the Kingdom of God to be a central theme throughout the biblical narrative. Earlier it was established that the Kingdom of God or heaven is a central theme in Matthew's Gospel. If one brings these two considerations to bear on Matthew 5:17 it might be argued that, given Matthew's desire to show that in Jesus the Scriptures have found their fulfilment – he is the one to whom they pointed – and given that the Scriptures point to the arrival of the Kingdom of God, the concept of fulfilment should be construed by this overarching motif. This would give fulfilment in Matthew 5:17 the meaning that, what the law and the prophets pointed towards, namely the arrival of God's Kingdom, has now come about in Jesus. Fulfilment means that the kingdom has come. Such an understanding of πληρóω in Matthew 5:17 has the benefit of placing this pericope not only in the context of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount and the context of Matthew's Gospel as a whole, but within the context of the sweep of Scripture's grand narrative. It fits well with the eschatological or prophetic understanding of the term, but it advances the concept beyond Christology (Jesus is the one to whom the Old Testament pointed) towards biblical theology (the Kingdom anticipated by the entire Old Testament revelation has arrived). The two factors that contribute to the prominence of a kingdom understanding are, firstly, the centrality of the kingdom in the Sermon on the Mount (directly below); and secondly, the partial parallel in Luke 16:16:
The centrality of the Kingdom of heaven or God in the Sermon on the Mount (Yarbrough
The Beatitudes are bookended by references to the Kingdom (5:3, 10);
The beginning of the central section (5:17–20) makes it clear that the Kingdom remains in view, since disciples who relax the law will be called least in the Kingdom, and disciples who fail to exhibit greater righteousness will face exclusion from it;
Perhaps the central request of the Lord's Prayer is that God's Kingdom would come (6:10);
The Kingdom is to be the disciples’ priority (6:33);
Entry into the Kingdom is in view at the Sermon's close where Jesus makes it clear that only those who do God's will receive entry into it (7:21).
The centrality of this concept must be brought to bear on Matthew 5:17. Isolating πληρóω from the context of βασιλεία results in much confusion in determining its nature:
The partial parallel in Luke 16:16 (Moo
Whatever the literary relationship between these passages, it is evident that both Matthew and Luke have salvation history in view: the time period of the law and the prophets has run its course on account of the preaching of the good news of the kingdom of God (cf. Bock
Parallels between Matthew and Luke.
Matthew 5:17–19 | Luke 16:16–17 |
---|---|
τὸν νόμον ἢ τοὺς προφήτας (17a). | Ὁ νόμος καὶ οἱ προφῆται (16a). |
ἕως ἂν παρέλθῃ ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ, ἰῶτα ἓν ἢ μία κεραία οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου (18b). | εὐκοπώτερον δέ ἐστιν τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν παρελθεῖν ἢ τοῦ νόμου μίαν κεραίαν πεσεῖν (17). |
τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν (19b & d). | ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ (16b). |
Two other factors also suggest their correspondence: firstly, these two passages contain the only occurrences of κεραία in the New Testament; and secondly, the only connections between νóμος and βασιλεία in the gospels occur in these two passages and Matthew 11:11–13.
There are, then, several connections between Matthew 5:17–19 and Luke 16:16–17, suggesting that the latter may shed some light on the former. When considering the possible senses by which πληρóω could be understood, the links with the Lucan passage strongly suggest that it should be taken in a salvation-historical sense. What the law and the prophets pointed to, namely the coming kingdom of God, has arrived in Jesus and can therefore no longer be seen in precisely the same light.
All this argues that ‘fulfilment’ and ‘kingdom’ should be conceptualised together. When they are, fulfilment may be understood in terms of the eschatological arrival of God's promised reign. This salvation-historical reading of fulfilment enables one to avoid both a wooden adherence to, and an antinomian dismissal of the law. Fulfilment speaks of the sum total of all that the law and Prophets anticipated: God's Kingdom now inaugurated by God's King.
This article has asked what it means that Jesus fulfils the law and the prophets. It has attempted to answer by bringing literary, exegetical and theological considerations to bear upon its interpretation.
Literary considerations:
Matthew's structure places the focus on Jesus’ authority.
Matthew's plot sees Jesus as the fulfilment of the story of Israel.
The Sermon on the Mount as a whole also places its focus on Jesus’ authority.
The antitheses also focus on Jesus’ authority and illustrate how the law is fulfilled.
The Kingdom of God forms the backdrop to the Sermon on the Mount, which has implications for how one understands the law and the prophets.
Finally, Matthew's concept of fulfilment has a salvation-historical flavour, that is, what happened in Israel's history anticipated the actions displayed in Jesus’ ministry.
These literary considerations provide extra weight to a salvation-historical reading of πληρóω in 5:17.
The inclusion of the prophets indicates a predictive function is in view.
Matthew regularly employs πληρóω to refer to the coming about of what was anticipated.
Matthew 11:13 illustrates that Matthew thought of the law as having a prophetic function. These constitute several of the regular arguments for the prophetic or eschatological view.
Biblical theology, especially when understood redemptive-historically, has highlighted the prominence of the concept of the Kingdom of God throughout Scripture as a theme that provides a form of unity amidst the diversity of Scripture. When we bring the respective insights of literary and theological exegesis to bear on Matthew 5:17, we see that what the law and prophets pointed towards, namely the arrival of the Kingdom of God, has come about in Jesus. The fulfilment to which Matthew refers, is the culmination of the biblical narrative in Jesus
When one brings literary and theological findings to bear on the question of what it means that Jesus has fulfilled the law and the prophets, the importance of the Kingdom of God, not only the Person and Work of Christ, is highlighted in our conceptualisation of fulfilment.
I would like to acknowledge with gratitude the assistance offered by Prof. Francois Viljoen (North-West University) and Dr Peter Smuts (Bible Institute of South Africa) in the completion of the research necessary.
The author declares that he has no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced him in writing this article.
A useful taxonomy of views prior to 1988 is provided by Davies and Allison (
Ross’ view (
My purpose here is not to argue for this structure above other proposals which have equal merit. I wish rather to point out the insights this structure yields to the question at hand.
Most scholars have assumed ‘kingdom of heaven’ to be the equivalent of ‘kingdom of God’ (Davies & Allison
The loaded concept of ‘salvation history’ has been understood in several ways. Here Eloff's ‘temporal’ definition (2008:87) from his recent essay on salvation-history in Matthew is followed: ‘salvation history (is) the
Viljoen (