Matthew 5:17-19 Did Jesus' Fulfillment of the Law Do Away with It?

Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets I am not come to destroy rather to fulfill [1] ^{satisfy [the requirements of the Law] Colossians 2:14} 18: For truly I say to you Till heaven and earth pass one yod or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be satisfied ^{John 19:30} [2] 19: Whosoever then shall break one of these least commandments and shall teach any so they 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 [3]

---

[1] ^{Matthew 5:17} Jesus said he came to fulfill the Law. Did he do that? Which part[s] did he fulfill? 

While Jesus hung on the cross, he cried out “It is finished, paid, completed, fulfilled.” What did he mean by that?

[2] ^{Matthew 5:17-18} Jesus said he came to satisfy the requirements of the Law. Did he?

Paul wrote that these requirements were against us ^{Colossians 2:14}.

Jesus said he came to satisfy the requirements of the Law (pay the debt), and he did that with his death on the cross ^{John 19:30}.

[3] ^{Matthew 5:19} Before the cross, Jesus had not yet satisfied all the requirements of the Law ^{John 19:30}. Context: In Matthew 5:17-19 (and in Luke 16:17), he was speaking from the position of still being under the Law. The requirements/sin debt had not yet been paid when he said this.

To say that after the requirements were satisfied [the debt was paid] at the Cross ^{John 19:30}, all are still required to observe the Mosaic Law which guarded and protected until faith came, misleads by taking this statement of Jesus out of context. When Jesus said he had not come to abolish the Law, he was clarifying his motivation. He then stated his purpose, which clarified the fine line between destroying something and fulfilling it. Jesus came to fulfill the requirements of the law that were against us, to take them out of the way by nailing them to his cross (Colossians 2:14). Did he accomplish his purpose?

Galatians 3:24-25 the Law ^nomos was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ that we might be justified by faith 25: But after that faith is come we are no longer under a schoolmaster [1]

---

[1] Galatians 3:24-25 is not speaking of the traditions of the elders. It was the acts of the law ^nomos that led to Christ and not the extra scriptural traditions. Nomos was the schoolmaster that pointed to the Messiah. No tradition of the elders could ever do that. Jesus said the traditions nullified the Word of God and made it of no effect. 

New Covenant believers, first called Christians at Antioch, have never been required to perform the acts of the law. The Bible says God's Law is written on our hearts. Jesus said when we love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, and strength, and we love our neighbors as ourselves, then we have fulfilled all the Law ^nomos and all the prophets. This is the Law ^nomou of Love (Romans 13:10). 

1 Thessalonians 4 Commentary

    1: For the rest then brethren we beseech you and exhort in [the] Lord Jesus even as [you] received from us how you should walk and please God [in] that [you] should abound more 2: For you know what charges we gave you through the Lord Jesus 3: For this is the will of God even your purity that you should abstain from porneia 4: Each of you should know how to possess your [own] vessels[1] in purity and honor 5: Not in passion of lust even as the nations which know not of God 6: That none go beyond and defraud the brethren in any matter because the avenger is the Lord concerning all these thing as we also forewarned you and testified 7: For God has not called us to uncleanness but to holiness 8: He therefore that despises despises not man but God who has also given to us his holy Spirit 9: But as touching brotherly love you need not that I write to you for you yourselves are taught of God to love one another 10: And indeed you do it toward all the brethren which are in all Macedonia[2] but we beseech you brethren that you increase more and more 11: And strive to be quiet and be busy with your own business and work with your own hands as we charged you 12: That you walk honestly toward them that are without ^{the unsaved} and have need [of] nothing 13: But I would not have you to be ignorant brethren concerning them which are asleep that you sorrow not even as others who have no hope 14: For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again even so them also which sleep[3] in Jesus will God bring with him 15: For this we say to you by the word of the Lord[4] that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep 16: For the Lord himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout of command with the voice [of the] archangel and with the trump of God and the dead in Christ shall rise first 17: Then we the living who remain together with them shall be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in [the] air and thus always with [the] Lord we shall be 18: So encourage one another with these words.

---

[1] This verse is an example of how extensively misogyny and gender-biased-English-translation-theology has been integrated into English Bible translations, and through these,  into the very warp and woof of Christian thought and life. 

   1 Thessalonians 4:4, is written in gender neutral terms and should be translated as such. Yet, with few exceptions, in virtually every Bible, the verse appears to be speaking to men only, by saying, “Every one of you possess his own vessel…” 

   The word (in verse four), almost universally translated as “his,” is a gender neutral word. It should always be translated as “your,” because the verse is speaking to both women and men—to all Christians equally, regardless of sex. 

 The word (in verse four), almost universally translated as “his,” is a gender neutral word. It should always be translated as “your,” [in this verse] because the verse is speaking both women and men—to all Christians, equally, regardless of sex. God has no double-standard when it comes to sexual purity and morality, but apparently, Bible translators and commentators do. And they have generally misapplied this verse, misleading God’s people to generally understand that it speaks to men only. This misunderstanding has, in turn, caused much consternation among men, who, apparently have been so stymied by the plain sense of the words, “Each of you possess your vessels in purity…,” that they have gone to ridiculous lengths to interpret it in a way that men could not only live with, but also have a possible excuse when they fail to obey it.

No interpretation of any verse in the New Testament, illustrates the low esteem in which women have traditionally been held, nor the lengths to which Bible translators and commentators have been willing to go in order to objectify women, nor the depths to which men have been willing to sink in order to excuse immoral behavior.

Despite it being a well known fact, that having a wife is no deterrent to a man hell-bent on immorality, respected and honored commentators suggest that 1 Thessalonians 4:4, speaks to a need for men to “procure” wives, so that the wives may “contribute” to the “usefulness” [of the husband] and “satisfy,” his sexual passions. Though the context of 1 Thessalonians 4:4, clearly speaks to all Christians—including women—instructing all Believers to possess the vessels of their bodies in holiness and purity, lexicons do not reflect this. No more than a surface perusal of popular resources, brings the shocking revelation that men simply refuse to take the admonition for what it clearly is, and can only see see it through the lens of a double-sided moral standard.

In expanded and more explanative terms, 1 Thessalonians 4;4 clearly says: “Without excuse, control yourself! Do not let your lust and porneia rule you. Whether you married or not, whether you are a woman or a man, keep yourselves pure!”

   Yet, despite the simplicity and self explanatory nature of this verse [verified within context of the entire passage], there appears to have been such a desperation among [the all-male body] of commentators and most Bible translators, concerning such an admonition, that they obviously began casting about in their minds how this could actually be accomplished in a way they could live with, and they seem to have come to an early consensus.

   It is a sad fact, almost universally acknowledged, that historically, men have been held to lower standards of morality and accountability than women. And a mere surface perusal of respected and much used Bible lexicons and commentaries on 1 Thessalonians 4:4, illustrates how perfectly this double-standard has been accepted as the norm. Probably the most popular is the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, where James Strong spells out the androcentric bent of both himself and his peers, when he defines the word, skeuos (G4632 can be translated as a vessel or, metaphorically, a body).

He makes the unusual claim, that the word, vessel, can also be translated as wife?!

Strong’s G4632 reads as follows: …“a vessel, implement, equipment or apparatus (literally or figuratively [specially, a wife as contributing to the usefulness of the husband].”

With one stroke of his pen, James Strong, one of Christianity’s most respected scholars, reduced women to little more than objects, whose only purpose for existence, is to contribute to the usefulness of men. H. H. Halley, thought highly enough of Strong’s alternative definition, that he alluded to it in his own publication, Halley’s Bible Handbook.

Can things get any worse? Yes. When we look at the word “possess,” as used in verse four [G2932], the lexicon suggests that the words “possess your vessels,” could alternatively read “Marry a wife.”  Another alternative given for the the entire verse, reads: “to procure for himself his own vessel (i. e. for the satisfaction of the sexual passion;” 

Why, has no one challenged these hateful and evil interpretations until now? This writer challenges them and refutes them, and calls them out as being from the evil one, from the seed of the serpent who is perpetually at enmity with the seed of the woman.

Men of God, stand up. Speak out. Reject doctrines that give men “a pass” on immorality, and allows for blame to shifted for this reason or that reason, and reduces your God-given equal counterparts to mere objects created for your “use’’ and sexual “satisfaction.” Reject this destructive paradigm and publicly renounce it.

   Women of God, stand up. Speak out. You are not objects to be used. 1 Thessalonians 4:4, is not speaking of marriage, but even within the context of marriage, you were not created to satisfy lust and porneia. As far as usefulness goes, with the help of the holy Spirit, both men and women are capable enough of finding ways to be useful to God, on their own, without reducing the status of their equal counter-parts to that of mere servants.

Do the alternative interpretations of 1 Thessalonians 4:4 make you angry? They should. And it is a righteous anger, indeed.

People of God, stand up. Speak out!   

[2] Alexander the Great was from Macedon[ia]. Neighboring countries include Greece and Albania. http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/ConciseMacedonia/similarities.html

 

[3] The doctrine of Soul Sleep is not taught in scripture. It is merely an interpretation which cannot be substantiated by the term used to describe the righteous dead, who are usually referred to as sleeping because of the hope of the resurrection. The term, only refers to their bodies which are sleeping in death. It does not refer to their souls, which never lose consciousness but go immediately to either Paradise (Abraham’s Bosom, *B.C.) or to be with the Lord (in Heaven, *A.D.). *Changing the term B.C. (“Before Christ) to B.C.E. (Before the Common Era) doesn’t change the amazing fact that God himself, divided time when he came to earth as a man. The time-line of history testifies to the historic fact of, and the amazing impact of, the life and death of Jesus Christ.  

[4] Paul was open about the fact that everything he said, was not, “Thus saith the LORD.” Some things he wrote were simply good advice according as he felt led by the Holy Spirit. Some things, he felt he had permission to say, but admitted that it was not Holy Writ. It is important to understand, that prior to the Third century, A.D. (or thereabouts), there was no single volume, called “the Bible,” such as we know it today. God’s people, in both the Old and New Covenants, had writings, that they considered Holy, but there was no hard and set consensus on what the so-called ”canon of scripture” consisted of. Even today, there is a division on the canon of scripture between Protestants, Jews, and Catholics. Most protestants reject the Apocrypha. Jews reject the New Testament. We do know, that Jesus himself confirmed, the Torah [the terms, Pentateuch, the five books of Moses, and the Law, all refer to the same thing—the Torah]. Jesus referenced the prophets, and the Psalms. He quoted from the Septuagint (LXX). He confirmed that the entire book of Isaiah was written by the same man (later the Dead Sea Scrolls added to the confirmation we already had from Jesus). All of these things, together, composed the scriptures of the early Church, and were rather quickly augmented by the writings of Peter, John, Paul, Jude, and James. Eventually also, by Matthew, John Mark, and Luke the physician (the book of Acts was also a writing of Luke). The early Church compared the writings of their New Covenant leaders to the sacred writings of the Old Covenant to find out if the things they were being was true, according to the scriptures they already had. This was in obedience to the Word of the LORD, through Isaiah, where the prophet instructed God’s people to compare anything they are told with what had already been written ^{Isaiah 8:19-20}. Any so called, “New Light” that did not align with the Law (towrah) and the testimonies (confirmations of the towrah), was no light at all, and should be rejected. That still holds true, today, as the entire volume of the book (the sum total of all scripture—whether written under the Old Covenant or the New, whether included in our “canon” or not), all of the towrah spoke of, and predicted the person and redemptive work of Jesus Christ. All Bible Prophecy revolves around the same ^{Psalm 40:7, Hebrews 10:7, Hebrews 10:1, Revelation 19:10}.

Galatians Chapter 3: Commentary

       1: O foolish Galatians who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth before whose eyes Jesus Christ has been evidently set forth crucified among you 2: This only would I learn of you received ye the Spirit by the works of the Law ^nomos or by the hearing of faith 3: Are you so foolish having begun in the Spirit are you now made perfect by the flesh 4: Have you suffered so many things in vain if it be yet in vain 5: He therefore that ministers to you the Spirit and works miracles among you does he [do] it by the works of the law ^nomou or by the hearing of faith 6: Even as Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness 7: Know ye therefore that they which are of faith the same are the children of Abraham 8: And the scripture foreseeing that God would justify   ethnic [peoples] ^ethnos [1] through faith preached before the gospel to Abraham saying in you shall all ethnic peoples ^ethnos be blessed 9: So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham 10: For as many as are of the works of the Law ^nomou are under the curse for it is written Cursed is every one who continues not in all things which are written in the scroll of the Law ^{biblion nomos} to do them 11: But that none is justified by the law ^nomO in the sight of God it is evident for the Just shall live by faith 12: And the Law ^nomos is not of faith But those who do them shall be bound by them 13: Christ has reclaimed us out of the curse of the Law ^nomou being made a curse for us for it is written Cursed is every one that hangs on a tree 14: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the ethnic peoples ^ethnos through Jesus Christ that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith 15: Brethren I speak after the manner of mortals Though it be but a human covenant yet if it be confirmed none disannuls or adds to 16: Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made He said not and to seeds as of many but as of one and to thy seed which is Christ [2]17: And this I say that the covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ the Law ^nomos which was four hundred and thirty years after cannot disannul that it should make the promise of none effect 18: For if the inheritance [is] from the Law ^nomos it is no more of promise but God gave it to Abraham by promise 19: Why then the Law ^nomos It was added because of transgressions till the seed should come to whom the promise was made and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator 20: Now a mediator is not a mediator of one but God is one 21: [Is] the Law ^Nomos then against the promises of God? God forbid for if there had been a law ^nomos given which could have given life verily righteousness should have been out of the Law ^nomou 22: But the scripture has concluded all under sin that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe 23: But before faith came we were garrisoned [guarded and protected] under the Law ^nomon having been locked up together into the faith which should afterwards be revealed [3] 24: Wherefore the Law ^nomos was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ that we might be justified by faith 25: But after that faith is come we are no longer under a schoolmaster [4] 26: For you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus 27: For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ [5] 28: There is neither Jew nor Greek there is neither bond nor free there is neither male nor female for ye are all one in Christ Jesus [6] ^{Acts 15:9, [Ephesians 3:4-9 The fellowship of the Mystery of Christ?]} 29: And if you be Christ’s then are you Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise [7]

---

[1] Semantics matter. In Bible translation, the Greek word, ethnos, refers to various ethnic peoples, ethnicities, tribes, nations, to all people other than Jews, and not in a derogatory manner. The word simply identifies a people group, tribe, or nation as non-Jew. But within Christian tradition it has so commonly been translated using the derogatory word, “heathen,” as to incite prejudice against any who were not English, not white, did not conform to English/“Christian” norms. Historically, all non-white/non-English (if not considered “Christian”) were called “heathens,” a really awful word that eventually came to encompass all who did not follow Christian “norms.” A look at just this one word “heathen” (and there are many more) shows that semantics are a powerful part of any propaganda machine.

Semantics have been used to color perceptions of not only non-whites and non-Jews, but also of 1.) non-citizens, 2.) non-wealthy, and 3.) non-males.

1.     Regardless of color, all non-Romans in the Roman Empire, were called barbarians. All barbarians could be brought into slavery. Many modern-day white Europeans are descendants of Roman-empire era slaves

2.     The modern English word “villain” [meaning: criminal, law-breaker, outlaw, offender, felon, convict, malefactor, a person or thing responsible for specified trouble, harm or damage], came from an old  English word, “villein,” meaning a serf or a peasant. The powers that be [the wealthy and aristocratic], viewed the poor as bad. The word used to describe the poor, back then, has passed down into modern English a word to describe wicked and evil people, which is exactly how the wealthy viewed the poor in ancient times.

3.     There are many derogatory words describing womenbut not so many describing men. Here are only a few examples: sexually promiscuous man/playboy; sexually promiscuous woman/whore/tramp/loose; unmarried older man whether or not he has been sexually promiscuous/eligible bachelor;  unmarried older woman who is a virgin; old maid; divorced man whether or not he is sexually promiscuous/eligible bachelor; divorced woman usually assumed to be sexually promiscuous/divorcee; The word divorcee does not refer to divorced men. It is typically used in reference to a divorced woman, who is usually viewed as someone who may more easily be seduced into sexual behavior because she is not a virgin.

[2] Galatians 3:17-19: Paul was writing of two covenants here.  The first was the covenant of promise given to Abraham and the other is the Law ^{nomos / nomou} given to Moses over four-hundred years later. The covenant with Abraham is forever. The Law ^nomou given to Moses was only until “The Seed ^Jesus” should come.  All three variations of the Greek word translated as Law in this passage (nomos, nomou, nomO) are used in reference to Torah, the acts of which are required only until the seed ^Jesus should come. The context of these three words [as used in verses 17-19], refute the claim that Paul was exclusive in his language in differentiating between Torah and the Traditions. In referencing Torah, Jesus also used the same variations of the same Greek words Paul used here. The phrase, “Until the seed should come,” clearly denotes the required acts of the Law ^Torah were a temporary requirement that would come to an end after the seed ^Jesus came. There are many other clear scriptures that attest to this.

[3] Under the Old Covenant, just as under the new, God’s people were justified by faith, and not works. By the statutes contained in the Torah ^nomon, the children of Israel were literally surrounded by and immersed in, the “faith that should come.” The faith that should come, would fulfill the requirements of the Law and do away with them. When the people went to the priest and offered sacrifice, when they ceremonially cleansed themselves according to the requirements of Torah, when they observed the great and prophetic Feasts of the Lord, they were illustrating something that had to do with the redemptive person and work of Jesus Christ. When the Torah was followed and obeyed in faith, it was counted to them as faith, even though they did not understand, at the time, that they were continually keeping the Messiah [his sacrifice and their justification by faith alone] before their eyes ^{Hebrews 10:1, Habakkuk 2:4}. 

[4] Galatians 3:24-25 is not speaking of the tradition of the elders. It was the acts of the Torah ^nomos that brought to Christ and not the extra scriptural traditions. [The] nomos was the schoolmaster that led to the Messiah. No tradition of the elders could ever do that. Jesus said the traditions nullified the Word of God, they made it of no effect.

New Covenant believers, Christians, are no longer required to perform the acts of Torah. The Bible says these acts are written on our hearts. Jesus said when we love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, and strength, and we love our neighbors as ourselves, then we will have fulfilled all of the Law ^nomos and all the prophets. The acts of Torah were the Law ^nomou of Love. It is of note that Jesus used the word nomou [along with four or five variations of the word] in referencing Torah. There is no single Greek word that applies specifically to Torah while all others refer to the traditions of the elders.

[5] Galatians 3:27 is not speaking of water baptism. It is speaking of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit which baptizes all believers into the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13).  

[6] Galatians 3:28 obliterates all notions of hierarchy within the body of Christ. There is no racial, ethnic, or gender hierarchy among the Out-Calleds of Christ. Unscriptural organizations have implemented hierarchy from the beginning, thus corrupting the worship, service, and preaching of Christ, limiting to males most forms of leadership seen in modern churches, but not ordained by our Creator.

[7] Galatians 3:29, is an awesome revelation to the Body of Christ that in no way negates promises made to the physical seed of Abraham [the Jews/Hebrews]. The Body of Christ and the people of the world who will inhabit the first one-thousand years of Christ’s earthly Kingdom will participate in the common wealth of the nation of Israel.

The Bible says, the New Covenant is a better covenant based on better promises. The Old Covenant contains amazing promises. But not a single promise made to Abraham and his physical descendants is taken from them and “transferred” to “The Church.” This is a false and anti-Semitic teaching that began with the organization founded by Constantine and later called Roman Catholicism, with the Vatican as its capitol and also its embassy. Not many understand that the Vatican City is a sovereign nation which many nations, including, the united states, have ambassador’s to. The goal of the Vatican has always been a literal, global dominion of Roman Catholicism in an attempt to usurp the promise that Israel will one day be the head nation in Christ’s global Kingdom.

Historically, the Vatican has used military and naval power (Spanish Armada) and terrorism (the Spanish Inquisition) to achieve this goal. They now use the ecumenical movement [which they founded] to achieve global dominance in appropriating to themselves, what God promised the Jews.  

Protestants also have their own anti-Semitic version of what it means to be “Abraham’s seed.” We see this in the false teachings of Reformed and Dominion theologies. Though reformed and dominion teachings are not identical and disagree on many points, but both paradigms appropriate to themselves promises made to Abraham, and both groups are anti-Semitic in their disavowal of the physical seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob…Israel. Some Messianic groups are anti-Semitic in this way, as well, using Galatians 3:29 as a basis for disavowing physical the Jews as God’s chosen people. 

Do you have the assurance of knowing that if you died today, you have Eternal Life?

Additional commentary pending for this chapter

Did you find this post helpful? Link to it and share with connections on social media 

Questions and comments are welcome