Skip to content

Verse Analysis

Verse-by-Verse Analysis

Matthew 5:17 — "Not to destroy, but to fulfil"

Context: Sermon on the Mount, Jesus speaking to disciples and multitudes. This is the preamble to the Antitheses (5:21-48) where Jesus deepens the law's application. Direct statement: Jesus denies he came to kataluo (demolish) the law or prophets. He affirms he came to pleroo (fill up/fulfill) them. Key observations: - kataluo (G2647) is the word for physical demolition of buildings (Mat 24:2 — temple stones thrown down; Mat 26:61 — "I am able to destroy the temple"). Jesus chose a word meaning thorough dismantling. - pleroo (G4137) — Matthew's characteristic word for prophetic fulfillment (16+ uses). But pleroo also means "fill up, make full, bring to completion." A vessel that is pleroo'd is full, not terminated. - The contrast kata-luo vs. ple-roo = loosening-down vs. filling-up. The opposite of demolition is completion/fullness. - This verse functions as Jesus's preemptive denial against the charge that he is a law-abolisher.

Matthew 5:18 — "Not one jot or tittle"

Context: Immediately following 5:17. Provides the temporal scope of the law's permanence. Direct statement: Until heaven and earth pass, not the smallest letter (iota) or stroke (keraia) shall pass from the law, until all is fulfilled. Key observations: - "heos an parelthe ho ouranos kai he ge" — "until heaven and earth pass away" — cosmic permanence marker - "ou me parelthe" — double negative with subjunctive = strongest possible negation in Greek - "heos an panta genetai" — "until all things come to pass/be accomplished" - Two temporal clauses: (1) until heaven/earth pass, (2) until all is fulfilled. The law's authority endures at least as long as the cosmos.

Matthew 5:19 — "Break one of these least commandments"

Context: Directly follows the permanence declaration. Direct statement: Whoever breaks (luo — related to kata-luo) even the least commandment AND teaches others to do so receives the lowest status in the kingdom. Whoever does and teaches them is called great. Key observations: - "luo" (G3089) shares the root with "kataluo" (G2647). Jesus warns against both personal breaking and teaching others to break. - "do and teach" — both practice and doctrine matter. - The "least commandments" are still binding — there is a distinction of weight (Mat 23:23) but not of validity.

Matthew 5:20 — "Exceed the righteousness of the scribes"

Context: Conclusion of the preamble before the Antitheses. Direct statement: Kingdom entrance requires righteousness exceeding that of the scribes and Pharisees. Key observations: - The Pharisees' problem is not law-keeping but inadequate/hypocritical law-keeping. - Jesus raises the bar, not lowers it. The Antitheses (5:21-48) demonstrate this — murder extends to anger, adultery extends to lust.

Romans 6:14 — "Not under law but under grace"

Context: Romans 6 — dying to sin and living to God. The argument from 6:1: "Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid." Direct statement: Sin shall not have dominion over believers because they are not under law but under grace. Key observations: - The PURPOSE of "not under law" is stated in the verse itself: "sin shall NOT have dominion over you." Being "not under law" is the basis for victory over sin, not for permission to sin. - Greek: hypo nomon (under law) vs. hypo charin (under grace). Both use hypo + accusative = "under the authority/domain of." - The very next verse (6:15) anticipates misunderstanding: "shall we sin because we are not under law? God forbid!" Paul explicitly denies the antinomian reading. - If "not under law" meant "the moral law no longer applies," then Paul's "shall we sin? God forbid!" in v.15 would be incoherent — sin is defined as law-transgression (1 Jn 3:4).

Romans 7:6 — "Delivered from the law"

Context: Marriage analogy (7:1-4). Death dissolves the binding legal relationship. Direct statement: We are "delivered from" (katargeo, G2673) the law, having died to what held us, to serve in newness of spirit not oldness of letter. Key observations: - Same word (katargeo) as Rom 3:31 — "do we katargeo the law? God forbid!" - The deliverance is FROM the law's binding, condemning, holding power ("wherein we were held"). - The RESULT of deliverance: "that we should serve in newness of spirit" — service continues, the mode changes. - The same chapter immediately defends the law: "Is the law sin? God forbid" (7:7); "the law is holy" (7:12); "the law is spiritual" (7:14); "I delight in the law of God" (7:22).

Romans 3:31 — "We establish the law"

Context: Conclusion of Paul's argument about justification by faith (3:21-30). Direct statement: Faith does not make void the law. It establishes the law. Key observations: - katargeo (G2673) = "render idle/useless" — Paul asks if faith renders the law useless. Answer: "me genoito" (God forbid / may it never be!) - histemi (G2476) = "cause to stand, establish, make firm" — faith causes the law to STAND. - This is Paul's direct answer to the question this study investigates. Paul explicitly denies that his faith-teaching abolishes the law.

1 Corinthians 9:20-21 — Paul's evangelistic flexibility

Context: Paul's rights as an apostle and his voluntary self-restriction. Direct statement: Paul becomes "as under the law" (hos hypo nomon) to reach Jews. He is "not without law to God" (ouk anomos theou) but "under the law to Christ" (ennomos Christou). Key observations: - Paul distinguishes being "hypo nomon" (under the law as a covenantal/jurisdictional system) from being "ennomos Christou" (lawfully subject to Christ). - Paul explicitly denies being anomos (lawless) toward God. He is still under law — the law of Christ. - This passage is Paul's own self-description: he is NOT lawless, he IS under Christ's law.

Galatians 3:23-25 — "Schoolmaster unto Christ"

Context: Paul's argument about the law's temporal-pedagogical function in salvation history. Direct statement: Before faith came, we were kept (phroureo — guarded) under law, shut up (sugkleio — enclosed) unto the coming faith. The law was a paidagogos (schoolmaster/tutor/guardian) unto Christ. Key observations: - phroureo = military guarding. sugkleio = enclosing, confining. Custodial language. - paidagogos = not a teacher but a guardian/attendant who supervised children until they came of age. The paidagogos did not become irrelevant because the child matured — the child now understood and internalized what the paidagogos enforced externally. - "After faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster" — the supervisory/custodial role ends, not the content of what was taught.

Galatians 4:4-5 — "Made under the law, to redeem them under the law"

Context: Continuation of the heir/child analogy. Direct statement: Christ was "made under the law" (hypo nomon) to redeem those "under the law" (hypo nomon). Key observations: - Christ himself was "under the law" — he submitted to its jurisdiction. - The purpose: "to redeem" — not from the law's moral content but from its condemning jurisdiction. Gal 3:13: "Christ hath redeemed us from the CURSE of the law."

Galatians 5:18 — "Led of the Spirit, not under the law"

Context: Spirit vs. flesh passage. Immediately preceded by "all the law is fulfilled in one word" (5:14) and followed by the fruit of the Spirit list. Direct statement: Those led by the Spirit are not under the law. Key observations: - Gal 5:14 (just 4 verses earlier): "all the law is fulfilled in one word: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." The law IS fulfilled — not abolished — by Spirit-led living. - Gal 5:22-23: "the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law." Spirit-produced character does not violate the law — there is nothing in the law against these things. The Spirit-led person naturally fulfills the law. - Being "not under the law" while "fulfilling the law" makes sense only if "under the law" means under the law's condemning/jurisdictional authority, not under the law's moral instruction.

Galatians 2:18 — Paul's use of kataluo

Context: Paul recounting the Antioch incident and the argument against returning to law-for-justification. Direct statement: "If I build again (oikodomeo) the things which I destroyed (kataluo), I make myself a transgressor (parabates)." Key observations: - Paul uses the SAME word Jesus uses in Mat 5:17 (kataluo). - What Paul "destroyed" (kataluo'd): the law-for-justification system. Building it again makes him a parabates (transgressor). - This is not destroying the moral law — Paul elsewhere calls the law "holy" and "spiritual." It is destroying the system of seeking justification through law-works. - Cross-reference with Rom 3:31: Paul does not katargeo (make void) the law; he histemi (establishes) it. But he does kataluo the law-as-justification-system.

Romans 8:1-4 — "No condemnation... righteousness of the law fulfilled"

Context: The resolution of Romans 7's struggle with sin. Direct statement: No condemnation for those in Christ. The law of the Spirit frees from the law of sin and death. The law's weakness was in the flesh, not in the law. God sent his Son so that the righteousness (dikaioma) of the law might be fulfilled IN us. Key observations: - "No condemnation" (v.1) connects to "not under the law" (6:14) — both address the condemnation question. - The dikaioma (righteous requirement) of the law is fulfilled in believers who walk by the Spirit — the law's moral content is achieved, not discarded. - The law's weakness was "through the flesh" (dia tes sarkos) — the problem was human inability, not divine law deficiency.

Romans 13:8-10 — "Love is the fulfilling of the law"

Context: Paul's practical instructions for Christian living. Direct statement: Love fulfills the law. Paul quotes five Decalogue commandments (6th-10th) as the content love fulfills. Key observations: - pleroo (G4137) — same word Jesus uses in Mat 5:17. Paul says love pleroo's the law. - Paul explicitly names Decalogue commands as the content of "the law" being fulfilled. This is the moral law, not ceremonial. - pleroma (G4138, noun) in v.10: "love is the pleroma of the law" — love is the fullness/completion of the law. The law remains as the container; love is the content that fills it.

Patterns Identified

Pattern 1: Paul's "not under the law" always accompanied by anti-antinomian safeguards

Every passage where Paul says "not under the law" is accompanied by: - "shall we sin? God forbid" (Rom 6:15) - "Is the law sin? God forbid" (Rom 7:7) - "the law is holy" (Rom 7:12) - "we establish the law" (Rom 3:31) - "the righteousness of the law fulfilled in us" (Rom 8:4) - "love is the fulfilling of the law" (Rom 13:10) - "not without law to God, but under the law to Christ" (1 Cor 9:21) - "all the law is fulfilled in one word" (Gal 5:14)

Pattern 2: Jesus's law-permanence accompanied by law-deepening

Every passage where Jesus affirms the law's permanence, he also deepens its application: - Mat 5:17-20 followed by Antitheses (anger = murder, lust = adultery) - Mat 23:23 affirms both weightier AND lesser matters - Mat 22:37-40 identifies love as the organizing principle

Pattern 3: Both authors use pleroo (G4137) for the law

  • Jesus: "I came not to destroy but to pleroo" (Mat 5:17)
  • Paul: "the dikaioma of the law might be pleroo'd in us" (Rom 8:4)
  • Paul: "he that loveth another hath pleroo'd the law" (Rom 13:8)
  • Paul: "all the law is pleroo'd in one word" (Gal 5:14) Both authors describe the law as something to be filled/fulfilled, not terminated.

Pattern 4: Paul distinguishes different senses of "law"

  • Law as moral standard: "holy, just, good, spiritual" (Rom 7:12,14) — affirmed
  • Law as condemning power: "not under the law" (Rom 6:14) — believers freed from this
  • Law as justification system: "not justified by works of the law" (Gal 2:16) — rejected as path to righteousness
  • Law as Scripture: "witnessed by the law and the prophets" (Rom 3:21) — law testifies to faith

Pattern 5: kataluo (G2647) — shared vocabulary, different referents

  • Jesus: "I did not come to kataluo the law" (Mat 5:17) — referent: the law's moral content and authority
  • Paul: "if I build what I kataluo'd" (Gal 2:18) — referent: the law-for-justification system
  • Both deny demolishing the law's moral authority. Paul demolishes the law-as-means-of-justification system.

Connections Between Passages

The Rom 3:31 Bridge

Romans 3:31 functions as a bridge between Paul's anti-law-justification teaching and Jesus's pro-law-permanence teaching: - Paul has just argued "justified by faith without the deeds of the law" (3:28) - Paul then asks: "Do we make void (katargeo) the law through faith?" - Paul answers: "God forbid! We establish (histemi) the law." - This is Paul's explicit statement that his faith-justification teaching does NOT abolish the law.

The Rom 6:14-15 / Mat 5:17 Connection

Both Jesus and Paul anticipate the charge that their teaching abolishes the law: - Jesus: "Think NOT that I am come to destroy the law" (Mat 5:17) - Paul: "shall we sin because we are not under the law? God forbid" (Rom 6:15) Both preemptively deny the antinomian interpretation of their teaching.

The Rom 8:4 / Mat 5:17 Connection

Both authors use pleroo for the law: - Jesus came to pleroo the law (Mat 5:17) - The purpose of Christ's coming was that the law's dikaioma might be pleroo'd in believers (Rom 8:4) Same word, same connection between Christ and law-fulfillment.

Word Study Insights

kataluo vs. katargeo — Two Different Words

A critical finding: Romans 3:31 does NOT use kataluo (Jesus's word in Mat 5:17). It uses katargeo (G2673). These are different words: - kataluo (G2647) = to demolish, tear down, disintegrate — physical/structural destruction - katargeo (G2673) = to render idle/useless, make of no effect, abolish — functional nullification

Paul denies both: - He does not kataluo the law (implicit — he never claims to demolish it) - He does not katargeo the law (explicit — Rom 3:31) - He histemi (establishes/stands) the law

However, Romans 7:6 uses katargeo for "delivered from the law" — the same word 3:31 emphatically denies. This is Paul using the same word in two different senses within the same epistle, which requires distinguishing what aspect of the law's function he denies vs. affirms.

hypo nomon — "Under the Law" Semantic Pattern

The complete catalogue of 12 Pauline uses of "hypo nomon" reveals that every use addresses the law's jurisdictional, penal, or justificatory function — never its moral instructional function. This is the critical finding for determining whether Paul and Jesus contradict: if "under the law" means "under the law's condemning jurisdiction" rather than "under the law's moral authority," then Paul's "not under the law" does not contradict Jesus's "I came not to destroy the law."