THE CATACOMBS
You are here: Home
> Catacombs > Articles
Does the ISV Rendering
of Matthew 5:17 "Destroy the Law"?
I
have a question concerning your renderings of Matthew 5:17-19 vs. Ephesians
2:15. According to Matthew's testimony, Jesus did not
come to "destroy the law" and
whoever "sets aside" His Father's law will be called least. Yet, the ISV
translates Eph.2:15, "He rendered the law inoperative, along with its
commandments and regulations". Isn't this a contradiction? Doesn't the
context of Scripture as a whole testify against The Son coming to render
His Father's law "inoperative".
No, it's not. The Greek text of Ephesians. 2:15 uses the verb
καταργήσας,
from the verb katargeo, which means to render inoperative. If you don't
like how the ISV renders Ephesians. 2:15, take a look at respected texts
like the King James, which render the verb as "abolished," as do NASB and
several other modern translations. These renderings are even more radical
and--to use your terms--contradictory to Matthew. The real problem you're
facing is that you're assuming there's a contradiction in Ephesians 2:15
to the passage you cited from Matthew. Ephesians is referring to the
enmity created by the law. It has been rendered inoperative. See
Ephesians 2:14 for the larger context of the passage which demonstrates
the truth of this. Matthew is referring to the place the Law has in the
theocratic structure of Israel. Jesus never abolished that, in
fact, He fulfilled
it. There's
no contradiction here.
Is this not the job of:
The Lawless One, Satan, Antichrist, The Beast, The wicked, The
Serpent to render God's Law "inoperative"?
No.
These entities don't render God's law inoperative. They render it
disobeyed. That is why they are described in Scripture as being
lawless, and not merely as being disobedient; i.e., they deny God his
right to make any laws at all, and thus lawlessness is a far greater sin
against God than "mere" disobedience.
|
