.
MATTHEWS5:17-48 Jesus and the law (cf Lk. 16:17; 12:58-59; 16:18; 6:27-36).
This long section is all on one theme, and it is important that its parts should not be interpreted in isolation from each other. The theme is Jesus' 'fulfilment' of the law, which is expressed by general statements (17-20) followed by a series of six examples contrasting Jesus' teaching with the accepted understanding of the OT law (21-47) and a concluding summary (48).
In vs 17-20 Jesus places the Law alongside the Prophets as finding fulfilment in him (for this sense of the law as 'prophesying' until Jesus came cf. 11:13; and Rom. 10:4; Gal. 3:24). To fulfil is to bring about that to which Scripture pointed, and that is what Jesus has now done. But the fulfilment of the law does not mean its abolition; it remains wholly authoritative and demands the fullest respect of the disciple (18-19). The question remains, however, how its function for the disciple is affected by its fulfilment in Jesus, and v 20 indicates that the meticulous legalism of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law is inadequate in the new context of the kingdom of heaven. Some higher approach is needed, and that is what vs 21-47 go on to spell out, by showing how Jesus' demand surpasses that of current ethical teaching based on the OT law. It does this not by being more scrupulous in literal observance but by penetrating to the true will of God enshrined in the law.
Thus in the first two examples (21-30) a mere literal avoidance of murder and adultery does not get to the heart of the problem. Underlying these outward acts are the fundamental attitudes of hatred and lust. Where the heart is not right, drastic action is needed to correct it before it results in outward sin.
Thirdly (31-32), a literal appeal to Dt. 24:1-4 had led to the sanctioning of divorce provided the due form of certification was observed, but Jesus restates God's original purpose of the permanence of marriage (see on 19:3-12 for fuller discussion).
Fourthly (33-37), Jesus sets aside the intricate discussion of the relative weight of different oaths (cf. 23:16-22) in favour of the ideal of simple truthfulness, which makes oaths and vows unnecessary. Here, as with the issue of divorce, Jesus refuses to allow the law's regulations, which were designed to control human sinfulness, to take precedence over God's original intention. Ethical standards must be built not on the law's concessions but on the positive purpose of God.
Fifthly (38-42), the natural desire for vengeance and retaliation may conveniently be justified from the OT's regulations, which were originally designed to limit the extent of legal retribution (An eye for an eye etc.}. But to extend this principle to personal ethics makes it a charter for self-interest. By a series of vivid examples (39-42), Jesus calls instead for an unselfish attitude which not only refuses to retaliate but does not resist, even when it would be legally right to do so. Such an attitude is one which subordinates one's own rights to the benefit of others.
Finally (43-47), the natural inference that the OT's command to love one's neighbour carries the corollary that one should hate one's enemy is replaced by the extraordinary command to love one's enemies. Here again Jesus goes far beyond the explicit teaching of the OT law and offers an ethic in sharp contrast to natural human values.
Thus, in all these examples a superficial observance of the letter of the law has given way to a radical search for the true will of God. This goes beyond the literal interpretation of the law and may indeed in some cases leave it on one side, as Jesus' sovereign authority [I say to you] reveals the radically alternative value-scale which discipleship must involve. It is amazingly but appropriately summed up in the concluding verse, Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. Legalism has been left far behind, and the law has been 'fulfilled'.
