Jesus' Relation to the Law of Moses
(Matthew 5:17-20)
By Bobby Graham

When Jesus was teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, was He merely explaining the Law to bring the Jews into closer alignment with God's will, or was He setting forth principles that would apply to the coming kingdom? It is understood, from the use of the word (reign, rule) and from various passages indicating its presence under the Mosaic arrangement, that a kingdom was already operating. It must also be understood, on the basis of various Old Testament prophecies and from Jesus' own predictions, that His kingdom was yet to come.

A Preliminary Consideration

Jesus' promise of the Spirit's coming to His apostles to remind them of His teachings and to guide them into all truth (John 14:26; 16:13) is crucial to a proper understanding of this matter. The Spirit's work would enable the apostles to teach Christ's word. If Jesus taught only to clarify the Law of Moses and the prophets, then the Spirit did not need to remind the apostles of Jesus' teaching and work. They would be teaching people living during the time of the New Covenant. The Holy Spirit, however, saw fit to reveal such matters for the benefit of all who would live after Pentecost, and I have to conclude there was something of value, something pertinent or relevant to our welfare, under the new arrangement of the New Covenant of Jesus Christ.

Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote their inspired records after the church began, so they could not have written for the benefit of the people still under the Law. In fact, if the sole purpose of the information Jesus taught during His lifetime was to point the Jews toward keeping the Law properly until He died on the cross, no one after the beginning of the church needed that teaching.

Some contend that, in order for what Jesus said while on earth to be part of the New Covenant, it must be repeated in the Law that went forth, beginning on Pentecost, at the church's beginning. This contention is sometimes based on the need for "confirmation by them that heard him." (Hebrews 2:3) The problem here is a misunderstanding of the meaning of the word "confirmed." It does not mean that earlier teaching had to be repeated by the apostles after Pentecost. Rather, the Holy Spirit working in them through their signs, wonders, and miracles (Hebrews 2:4), made what Jesus did and taught firm, established, or guaranteed.

While He was on earth, Jesus spoke of the "great salvation;" in fact, He was the first to speak about it, arranging for others to confirm it later. This raises a crucial question: If Jesus merely clarified and explained the Law of Moses, where was there room for Him to speak of the "great salvation" that He brought to the world? Another crucial question also arises: If Jesus' teaching related only to the Law, why did the Spirit, after Pentecost, need to remind the apostles of His earlier teaching so that they could proclaim and record it for mankind's benefit?

The Role of the Law

What role did Moses' Law play, and what was Jesus' relation to it? The answers to these questions are crucial to understanding these matters. We know that Jesus did not come to earth to destroy--but to fulfill/complete--the Law and the prophets (Matthew 5:17-18). We can learn that He did not abrogate the Law prior to God's appointed time--at the cross (Colossians 2:14; Ephesians 2:14). Nor did He disregard its instructions and implications for Him, as evidenced by His obedience and His attitude described in our text and seen during the totality of His ministry. He observed the Law's instructions, participated in its ceremonies, and enjoined its obligations on others in far more instances than we need to cite here. He lived and died while Moses' Law was in effect (Galatians 4:4; 3:19-25). Only after Jesus lived, died, arose, and ascended could the gospel system/new covenant/law of Christ go forth from Jerusalem as the prophets predicted it would (Isaiah 2:4; Luke 24:46-47).

In view of His proper regard for the Law and the prophets, why did Jesus insert this statement at this point in His Sermon on the Mount? Against the backdrop of the teaching about the end of Moses' Law and the beginning, from Pentecost onward, of His way, Jesus must have been attempting to thwart any misunderstanding of His view of the Law and His relation to it. He did not want His listeners to think that He encouraged, by statement or example, disregard for God's Law. His focus was on preparing material for the coming kingdom. Just as King David gathered materials in preparation for the temple that Solomon would build, so Jesus, and John before Him, by their teaching, prepared spiritual material for the church.

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus set forth primary principles to guide the thinking and conduct of kingdom citizens, though the kingdom was still in the future. While it is true that the basic moral principles that He taught were not appreciably different from those of the Law and the prophets (Matthew 7:12; 22:40), it is also correct to say that He extended them and applied them in ways that they had never before been understood. In the series of contrasts found in Matthew 5:21-48, He certainly dealt with the Jews' misunderstanding of the Law and, possibly, of Pharisaic teaching (as in 5:43). It is highly unlikely that here, immediately after upholding the Law and the prophets, He was placing Himself in opposition to the Law itself.

It is also significant that the Son of God, the soon-to-be King of the new kingdom, asserted His own authority in His repeated pronouncements ("but I say unto you"). Little wonder that the people saw a profound difference between His authoritative teaching and that of the scribes. He took the foundation laid in the Law and then built kingdom law on that foundation; what began as an early bud under the Law later blossomed under Christ's gospel.

Remember also that Jesus' teaching about love, begun here in this sermon, He later summarized and applied to his disciples' love for each other, calling His teaching "a new commandment." (John 13:34) It was new (kainos) in quality, form, or nature--not in time.

There should be no doubt that Jesus, in His own ministry, prepared people for the coming kingdom, even while He obeyed the Law of Moses and urged His listeners to do the same. He was seeking a holy people, like Israel could have been had they obeyed the Law. His ministry's purpose was preparatory, while He personally also looked backward to the Law under which He lived. To be faithful to God, Who sent Him to prepare for the future, He could not do otherwise.

Other Preparations for the Kingdom

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus prepared people for the kingdom. To exclude this element of His ministry is to strip Him of part of the reason He came to earth in the flesh. The prophets had explained the Law, clarified its spiritual impact on the lives of the Israelites, and urged them to obey from the heart. Jesus was not just another prophet in the long line of Old Testament prophets, though He was a divine prophet (Hebrews 1:1-4). He was God's final Prophet Who had to be heard. Even during Christ's life, God spoke from heaven to certify Him as the One to be heard, in contrast to Moses and Elijah, whose time was either past or passing (Matthew 17:5). Even then, He had to be heard, for He had something to say that the Law and the prophets did not fully say. At a time when the Jews understood little about the spiritual nature of the coming kingdom, Jesus' teaching provided a needed element as He staked out the spiritual boundaries for all to know. Though He did not give all details concerning the church, He did clarify its spiritual nature and character.

In addition to Jesus' teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, He gave other specific teaching that would apply to the new kingdom/church.

In reality, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus had already dealt with the fundamental principles of obedience or submission to Him, defining them as the way to enter the kingdom (Matthew 5:20; 7:13-27).

The many kingdom parables Jesus taught said much concerning the coming kingdom, not the kingdom of Old Testament Israel. We believe this is true because Jesus would not have tried to conceal that kingdom's mysteries at such a late date, when its very survival was in jeopardy, especially in view of His effort to "clarify the law of Moses," as some claim he was doing (clarifying and concealing do not fit together).

To deny that Jesus could teach concerning the church during his personal ministry is to deny without Biblical proof. The proof shows that he did so; to assert otherwise is to state a theory requiring proof not given.

A Similar Situation

While Israel was in Egypt, did not Moses reveal the Passover observance, at least in its elementary stage, and yet later actually reveal it fully in the Law for continuing observance? Did he not reveal, in Exodus 16, the Sabbath regulation as a test of their willingness to obey God, though not until Mount Sinai was it revealed for their perpetual observance (Nehemiah 9:13-14)?

It is obvious that while the first arrangement (the Patriarchal) was in force, God set forth that which would come under the next arrangement (the Mosaic Covenant). If such could happen then, why could it not also happen during Jesus' ministry? He kept the Law and urged others to do so, while He made preparation for the next covenant (His own) by instilling spiritual material in the people who were willing to listen? To concede what happened earlier in Bible history, as we have pointed out, is to admit the possibility of its reoccurrence while Jesus was present on earth. It was more possible then than it had been earlier! If one wishes to call this kind of situation a merging of two covenants, as if such could ever happen, he may do so; but he has misnamed it, for the One who planned all covenants/economies has the right to provide such previews/prophecies as He deems best. Who is man to counsel God? He has the right to test man's faith in whatever way He chooses, or to preview His coming economy as He sees fits.

Sometime ago, I read this article by Brother Graham and thought it to be an excellent dissertation on Jesus and the Law of Moses. Over the past few years, I've had discussions with brethren who seek to include the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) in the Old Covenant. At first, I could not understand why they would make such an argument. Yet, as with most error, in time the reason became apparent. It is really quite simple. If one wishes to avoid a certain Scripture passage on a given subject, this is a way to explain it away.

Jesus Sermon on the Mount proclaimed the coming of His kingdom-the church. He taught the new attitudes for those who were to be part of this kingdom. Part of Jesus' teaching in the gospels had to do with marriage, divorce, and remarriage. "So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, let not man separate. They said to Him, 'Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?' He said to them, 'Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.'" (Matthew 19:6-9)

Jesus was showing what the old LAW said and what would be LAW for the new kingdom-spiritual Israel. He has all authority in His kingdom (Matthew 28:18). Those who seek to justify unlawful marriages and divorces take the position that these words were given to the Jews-not to Christians. Some say that Jesus was merely clarifying Moses' Law. If this is so, why did He go back to the beginning to answer the question concerning divorce? (Matthew 19:3,4)

Sadly, they forget something else-the plan of salvation--taught in the Gospels. "And He said to them, 'Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.'" (Mark 16:15,16) Why did He give divine instruction to go to the whole world with the gospel, if the words given were just to the Jews? What passages do we use to show an offended brother how to correct sin between himself and his brother? Jesus told them to go to the church if the problem could not be resolved between brethren and witnesses. I believe it is Matthew 18:15-18. Oops, that was only written to the Jews! Consistency thou art a jewel!

This is not new. Since the first century, men have perverted and twisted the Scriptures to avoid applying certain truths in their lives. Giving false teaching a different name and trying it one more time produces the same result-FAILURE! (KMG)


Go Back to our Main Page