Interpreting Matthew 5:17-20 (one of the most difficult passages in the Gospels)
It
is difficult to know how much of this passage, if any, originated with Jesus
and how much is to be attributed to the author/redactor of the Gospel. Either
way, it’s in our sacred text and we are faced with the task of making sense of these
words from Matthew’s Jesus.
What
is Matthew’s Jesus saying? The most obvious reading is that Matthew’s Jesus
takes a strict view of the Jewish law. But how then can this text be reconciled
with a text like Matt. 12:1-8, where Jesus clearly disregards Sabbath law,
offering as justification an example from the life of David where David clearly
violates the Torah requirements regarding the sacred bread in the holy place?
The tensions/contradictions these differing responses to the Jewish law create
are not easily resolved.
What
may have prompted the writer in 5:17-20 to be so insistent (or so over-the-top)
on the continued validity of the Jewish law?
Part
of the answer is that he is preparing the way for the antitheses that come next
in the Sermon on the Mount where he contrasts, “You have heard that it was
said” with Jesus’ “But I say to you.”
Then,
too, maybe some in Matthew’s community/church were pushing for the abrogation
and abolishment of the Torah all together and Matthew pushes back (overreacts?).
Matthew
insists that the law still has validity and must be respected, and that Jesus
as the divinely inspired interpreter of the law, has come to “fulfill” the law
rather than “abolish” it (5:17).
What
does it mean for Jesus to “fulfill” the law? It’s very ambiguous. It could mean
that Jesus “adds” to the law, or “obeys” the law, or “confirms/establishes” the
law, or “completes/perfects” the law, or “reduces” the law to the supreme
command to love. Maybe all these ideas are intended or a combination of them.
Matthew’s
main general point seems to be (regardless of the precise meaning) is that
Jesus is not in any way opposed to the law; he ministered squarely within the
tradition of the Torah.
I
like to think of Jesus “fulfilling” the law in the sense that Jesus fulfilled,
completed, perfected the law’s divine intent, namely, to create a righteous
community—a community right with God, each other, and all creation. Jesus
demonstrated the true spirit of the law.
The
problem is that in fulfilling the law Matthew’s Jesus shows little concern for
the “strokes and letters” of the law emphasized in 5:18. For all practical
purposes in some cases “fulfilling” the law meant abolishing the law (see
5:38-42).
Other
passages in Matthew such as 19:16-22; 22:34-40; and 23:23-24 add to our
understanding of how Matthew’s Jesus fulfills the law. Jesus invited the rich
young man, who had kept the commandments all his life, to a deeper allegiance
and commitment by giving all his wealth to the poor and following him. Jesus said
that all the law and the prophets hang on loving God and loving neighbor as
oneself. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for neglecting “the weightier matters of
the law” like “justice and mercy and faith,” while meticulously keeping laws of
tithing.
The
last example above can be employed as a guide for interpreting Matt. 5:20: “For
I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and
Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”
However
we make sense of Matt. 5:17-20 certainly Matthew’s Jesus had great respect for
the Torah. Jesus “fulfills” the intent and spirit of the Torah aimed at
creating a righteous community.
It’s
interesting that in Matt. 1:19 Joseph is called “righteous” because he did not carry
out the letter of the law. Joseph was “righteous” in disobeying the law, which
demonstrates that sometimes particular laws can stand in direct opposition to
the overall aim, intent, and spirit of the law. No interpretation of Matthew
5:17-20 can resolve all these tensions.
One
way to read Matt. 5:17-20 in a contemporary context, though it is very unlikely
that the author would have intended this, is to read 5:18-19 in light of Jesus’
“fulfillment.” Since Jesus “fulfilled”—“accomplished” or completed the intent
of the law—the law now in effect is the law of love that Jesus taught and
embodied in the rest of the Sermon on the Mount. The “commandments” referenced
in 5:19 are Jesus’ teachings/commandments.
Or
a slightly different version of the above reading makes the law in 5:18 the law
of love that will be “accomplished”—realized fully—in the kingdom to come.
We
can also draw the following analogy: It’s important for disciples of Jesus
today to respect the totality of Scripture, even the parts that have no
authority in our lives. It is clear, in light of the revelation of God’s will
in Christ, that there are Scriptures that are inadequate, deficient, and stand
in direct opposition to the gospel of Jesus. Their teaching value is in showing
us how people of faith can misunderstand and deviate from God’s will, how
faithful people can regress and completely miss what is redemptive and
transformative. Even regressive laws and Scriptures serve a purpose.
What
is starkly clear in this text, regardless of the difficulties in reading it, is
that Jesus is our guide. Disciples of Jesus do not look to the Torah, they look
to Jesus, and in particular, the Sermon on the Mount delivered by Matthew’s
Jesus. What matters to Jesus must be what matters to us—his disciples.
Comments
Post a Comment