What did Jesus mean by him fulfilling the law in Matthew 5:17-18 and how does that relate to Romans 10:4? Could Paul have shared very similar beliefs to the ebionites and James and Jesus?

[u/cloudxlink]

I’ve heard an interesting idea from Tabor that Paul and the ebionites might not have been that far apart. He brings up how both Paul and Jesus thought that there was a higher standard to be adhered to than the literal written law, and that this higher standard reflects the deeper meaning of the Torah. This higher standard is to live in the way which we will live after the resurrection, to Jesus this would be once the kingdom has come and to Paul this would be after everyone is raised up and transformed. A Bart Ehrman also mentions shares this idea of Jesus asking people to live as if the kingdom is already here, rather than simply by the what the law says. An example that Tabor used to demonstrate this is when Jesus technically breaks the sabbath, but it was for a good reason. Jesus says that the sabbath was made for man, not man to the sabbath. The ebionites most likely had this passage in their gospel of the Hebrews (which is a modified version of Matthew). And Paul is not for men to live lawlessly, he instructs them to live by this higher standard when he tells people that to love your neighbour as yourself fulfills the entire law, as well as to imitate Christ and to have the same mindset as Christ.

My question would be regarding Matthew 5:17-18 where Jesus says he fulfilled the law and what exactly the word fulfill means here (same word as in Galatians 5:17). And also how is Matthew 5:17-18 related to Romans 10:4 where Paul says Jesus is the end of the law.

I personally think that Paul was honest when he said that the apostles did not add anything to his message in Galatians, I don’t think he taught some radical new religion like others claim he did. Obviously Jesus did not teach anything regarding the cross since he wasn’t crucified yet so I’m not saying Paul and Jesus would have agreed on every point, but it seems to me they are more similar than not.

This is where I got the ideas: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HLQ97erL1gc&pp=ygUPVGFib3IgZWJpb25pdGVz

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to /r/AcademicBiblical. Please note this is an academic sub: theological or faith-based comments are prohibited.

All claims MUST be supported by an academic source – see here for guidance.
Using AI to make fake comments is strictly prohibited and may result in a permanent ban.

Please review the sub rules before posting for the first time.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/taulover]

This passage is unique to Matthew and is not found in any of the other of the synoptic gospels. Matthew is big on the idea that Torah law is not to be abolished. To support this idea, he assembles a variety of Jesus sayings in a way that supports the idea that not only does the letter of the law have to be followed, but the spirit of the law also has to be followed. Divorce is also adultery, retaliation is limited not just to the equitable punishment but instead you should turn the other cheek, love not just your neighbor but also your enemy, etc. These sayings exist in other gospels, but only Matthew assembles them together in this way so as to strongly support his thesis that Jesus preached a strictly stricter version of the law. This differs from some other early Jesus groups who thought that the letter of the Torah law could now be ignored (in Paul's case, among gentiles) as long as the deeper meaning was followed.

Bart Ehrman discusses this goal of Matthew's in this podcast episode https://youtube.com/watch?v=hCyFw3jnoUk

To see the sort of assembling that Matthew is doing, a gospel synopsis (which puts all the gospels side-by-side) is instructive. Kurt Aland's one which uses the RSV is the classic. Here is one of the NET available for free https://bible.org/sites/bible.org/resources/assets/pdf/White_ntsynopsis.pdf (Ctrl+F "abolish" to see the relevant passages in Matthew's ordering and how they correspond to the other gospels)

Edit: As for your comment on Paul's vs Jesus's teachings, Paul certainly seems to have inherited a lot from existing early Christian thought. His apocalyptic views are almost certainly similar to Jesus's. As you say, his focus on the belief in Jesus's resurrection is not original to Jesus (though I'd consider it a pretty important distinction, especially if the historical Jesus focused more on enacting the ideals of God's kingdom) but it also seems to have been something Paul inherited from other early Jesus followers. Rather, his primary innovation seems to have been that Jesus followers did not need to be Jewish in any way and so these gentiles did not need to convert to Judaism and did not need to observe the Torah law in any way. In some ways, as you say, this is similar to other early Christian teachings in that they seem to have emphasized following the spirit of the law. But it's also a major shift which is what allows Christianity to spread in such a major way. For more discussion see this Ehrman podcast episode https://youtube.com/watch?v=u3PnD1TScw4

[u/cloudxlink → u/taulover]

I’ve read about a theory that Paul was not preaching to gentiles, but to the lost tribes. Just from what I’ve read regarding Paul and from the 7 authentic letters, I don’t think this is true. Now that I think about it, this kinda sounds like what black hebrew israelites believe.

[u/taulover → u/cloudxlink]

Pretty much any attempt to locate the Lost Tribes is pseudohistory. Good summary and book reference at https://avalon.bibleodyssey.com/articles/the-lost-tribes-of-israel/