Fulfillment unto Righteousness
by John Drury
Matthew 5:17-20
17) “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets:
I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.
18) For truly I say to you, until the heaven and the earth shall pass
away, one iota or one tittle will in no way pass away
from the law, until all has been accomplished.
19) Whoever then shall break one of the least of these commandments, and
shall teach men so, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever
shall practice and teach, this one will be called
great in the kingdom of heaven. 20) For
I say to you, that unless your righteousness will abound above that of the
scribes and Pharisees, in no way will you enter into the kingdom of heaven.”[i]
Introduction
In
these words Jesus rebuts any accusation that he and his followers are
antinomians. On the contrary, they claim
to be the true followers of the law. I
propose this claim to be the meaning of plhrwsai the law. Jesus has come to fulfill the law in his
actions, and his disciples are to follow suit by fulfilling the law according
to his interpretation of it. The “new
law” which follows (5:21-7:12) is introduced by this statement of purpose:
Jesus fulfills the law in deed and word so that his disciples may too have a
better righteousness.
Setting
the Stage
Matthew
5:17-20 can be treated as an independent formal unit. Whether the teaching originated with Matthew
or contains pre-Matthean material,[ii]
it congeals into one coherent thought in Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount. It functions as a hinge between the
introductory material of 5:3-16 and the body of the SM in 5:20-7:12. It is best understood as an introduction to
Jesus’ “new law,” comprised of the following antitheses (5:21-48)[iii]
as well as better righteousness described in 6:1-7:12.
Before
offering his new interpretation of the law, Jesus presents these “hermeneutical
principles,” as Hans Dieter Betz refers to them.[iv] Jesus affirms the validity of the law in the
face of opposition and calls his disciples to practice the law according to his
forthcoming interpretation.[v] This interpretation follows familiar Rabbinic techniques.[vi] Such a succinct introduction is stylistically
unique. Matthew 5:17-20 poignantly sets
the stage for the body of the Jesus’ interpretation of the law.
Matthew
5:17-20 would have certainly been a key passage in the Matthean
community. It could be used as both a
polemic against a false understanding of their attitude toward the law as well
as an apologetic for their particular approach to Judaism. These verses contain parallelisms making them
easy to memorize,[vii] so any
member of the community would have access to these identity-forming words.
Action-Oriented
Argument
However,
these words are not merely meant to repeated as a
creed. Their meaning points directly to
responsive action by the hearers. Jesus’
disciples are to have a better righteousness because of his fulfillment of the
law. The relationship of v. 17-18 to v.
19-20 will make this clear.
Each
verse of Matthew 5:17-20 may stand alone as a complete thought.[viii] However, together they form a continuous
argument in two movements.[ix] The first movement declares Jesus’
fulfillment of the law (17-18). The
second exhorts the hearers to a response of better righteousness (20). This two-part structure is signified not only
by the content of the verses but also the presence of the transitional oun. The following outline exhibits this
rhetorical connection:
I. Declaration of Purpose: Jesus has come to fulfill the Law (17-18)
A. Purpose Statement (17)
a Falsified Statement: Do not think that
I have come
to abolish the law
or the prophets
b Corrected Statement: I have come not
to abolish but to fulfill.
B. Substantiating Statement:
Affirmation of the Law (18)
[chiasm]
For truly I say to
you,
a Qualification: until the heaven and
the earth shall pass away,
b Affirmation: one iota or one tittle will in no way pass away from the law
c Qualification: until all has been
accomplished.
oun
II. Exhortation: Do and Teach Jesus’ Fulfilled Law unto a Better
Righteousness (19-20)
A. First Call: Keep the Law (19)
[antithetical
parallelism]
a Whoever then shall break one of the
least of these commandments,
and shall teach
men so,
b will be called least in the kingdom of
heaven;
c’ but whoever shall practice and teach,
d’ this one will be called great in the kingdom
of heaven.
B. Second Call: Better
Righteousness (20)
For I say to you,
a that unless your righteousness will
abound above that
of the scribes
and Pharisees,
b in no way will you enter into the
kingdom of heaven.
The
aim of the argument therefore points toward the righteousness of the
disciples. Jesus’ own purpose with
regard to the law is not an end in itself.
This ought not to come as a surprise, for Matthew 5:17-20 lies amid the didache of the SM.
Therefore, the meaning of Jesus’ words about the law must be understood
in relation to the practice which flows out of them.
Action-Oriented Fulfillment Language
How
does the righteousness of the disciples relate to Jesus’ statement of
purpose? The connection is far more
subtle than simply obedience to his teaching.
Throughout his whole gospel, Matthew depicts a deep continuity between
Jesus and his disciples. They share in
his mission. If Jesus has come to
fulfill the law, so they too must fulfill it.
Awareness
of this continuity raises difficulty in the interpretation of plhrwsai. What does is mean for Jesus to have come plhrwsai the
Law? How can the disciples possibly
participate in this act? Plhrwsai is
often interpreted in direct contradiction to katalusai. Katalusai is rightly understood as a technical
legal term,[x] meaning
to abrogate a once valid law. Matthew
uses the term later in a non-legal sense with regard to the destruction of the
Temple (24:2; 26:61; 27:40). However, it
is appropriate to see the legal use at work in the teaching context of the SM.
However,
the interpreter ought not to use the lingual contrast of 5:17 to lock plhrwsai
into a strictly legal sense.[xi] Plhrow plays too large a role in Matthew’s
depiction of Jesus as the fulfillment of Scripture. Before the first word of the SM is spoken,
Jesus’ life story has fulfilled the words of the prophets five times (1:22;
2:15; 2:17; 2:23; 4:14). Throughout the
rest of Matthew’s gospel, Jesus will fulfill the scriptures seven more times
(8:17; 12:17; 13:35; 21:4; 26:54; 26:56; 27:9).
Only twice does Matthew use plhrow in the more straightforward sense of
“to fill up” (13:48; 23:32). Even
without 5:17, Matthew’s Jesus is clearly the one who comes plhrwsai the
scriptures.
What
is unique to 5:17 is the combination of plhrow with a hlqon
purpose statement. Furthermore, the
context is that of teaching rather than narrative action. How does this peculiar instance tie into the Matthean verbal thread traced above? Most commentators let it stand alone as a
statement of Jesus’ attitude toward the Law. Albright and Mann say it refers to Jesus’
“mission as it related to the Law.”[xii] Dibelius defines
Jesus’ fulfillment of laws as “deepening and extending their significance” in
order to “ascertain the true will of God.”[xiii]
Betz goes as far as to say that “the significance of his coming (that is, the
aim and result of his historical existence) was his interpretation of the Torah
-- and nothing more.”[xiv] These interpretations are forced to ignore
Matthew’s persistent use of plhrow to describe Jesus’ unique
scripture-fulfilling life.
The
misunderstanding lies in a false distinction between doing and teaching.[xv] Jesus ministry fulfills the scriptures in
deed. His teaching would seem to fulfill
the scriptures in word. Yet teaching is
not an end in itself. It is pointed
toward action. Teaching finds its final
purpose and meaning when it is enacted.
So both Jesus’ doing and his teaching end in doing. Embodied righteousness is the final goal.[xvi] So Matthew 5:17-20 represents far more
than Jesus’ “hermeneutical principles.”
It is an invitation to join him as he fulfills the law and the prophets.[xvii]
Conflict,
Identity, and Dikaiosunh
This
invitation turns us to the goal of Jesus’ purpose statement: the better
righteousness of the disciples. This
better righteousness is defined in contrast with the Pharisees and
scribes. Matthew’s text transparently
reveals the conflict between the Matthean community
and contemporary Pharisees and scribes.
They are being persecuted for their unique approach to Jewish Law. Furthermore, Matthew’s community is troubled
over its association with false believers.[xviii] Matthew depicts the community as having both
good and bad persons in it (10; 13:37-43; 22:11-14). How can they secure their
identity amid these external and internal pressures?
These words of Jesus serve as exhortation to
have a righteousness even greater than those who
persecute them. This is their part in
fulfilling the law. The verbal
connection to Matthew 3:15 is unmistakable: Jesus is
to be baptized in order to plhrwsai pasan dikaiosunhn.[xix] Fulfillment in 3:15 is action-oriented. In the same way, the disciples are to
“fulfill all righteousness” by following Jesus’ interpretation of the Law. Dikaiosunh continues to be to thrust of Jesus’
SM exhortation to his disciples (5:6, 10; 6:1; 6:33). It appears that dikaiosunh
describes proper action in accordance with God’s will as mediated through
Jesus’ teaching. It is the final
criterion for entrance into the Kingdom.
However,
more is at work in Matthew’s use of dikaiosunh than eschatological threat. The Matthean
community must have a better righteousness in order to secure their identity as
the true followers of the Torah. Hence
the call to righteousness (v. 19-20) is rooted in the affirmation of the Law
(v. 17-18). In the context of a
persecuted formative group, it is overwhelming necessary to affirm the
community’s continuity with an grand tradition such as
the Jewish Law.[xx] Matthew 5:17-20 responds to the charge that
Jesus’ followers are antinomians. [xxi] Jesus’ affirmation of the Law is not only a
matter of legal creed; it is matter of identity.[xxii] The only way for the Matthean
community to secure this identity is to have a righteousness which exceeds even
that of their accusers. Such a better
righteousness must have an integrity[xxiii]
consistent with Jesus teaching in 5:21-7:12.
Conclusion
and Application
Jesus
has come to fulfill the scriptures. He
does so by embodying them in his life.
This embodiment is to be carried out in his disciples too. Jesus’ purpose statement of fulfillment finds
its own fulfillment in the righteousness of his followers. I have tried to show that the verbal tie
between Matthew 5:17-20 and narrative of Jesus’ life drives home this
point. Furthermore, this point would
have been well taken by a community in the midst of an identity crisis. Despite accusations to the contrary, Jesus
and his followers are the true embodiment of the Jewish Law.
Identity
remains an issue for Christians to this day.
We can listen over the shoulder to the Matthean
crisis and empathize in their struggle.
In the post-Christian Western culture, the church gropes in the dark for
a worthy identity. The call of Matthew’s
Sermon on the Mount is better righteousness.
In response to the accusation of hypocrisy, we must pursue
integrity. We have the authority of
Jesus, but it is worth very little if we do not carry on his fulfillment.
We
also cannot ignore the fact that Jesus unabashedly affirms the Jewish Law. This reminds us to have a renewed respect and
understanding of our Jewish contemporaries.
It also critiques any tendency toward antinomianism. We are clearly called to be law-fulfilling
persons. The Christian tradition has
debated for centuries over how to remain lawful while affirming the particular
significance of Jesus. The place to
start would be the Sermon on the Mount.
In the face of uncertainty and interpretive dialogue, we must never
forget the importance of doing the Sermon on the Mount.[xxiv]
As this paper has shown, Jesus’ teaching
is only completed by our action.
Fall 2001