The Law and Its Fulfillment: Biblical Law from Sinai to Christ
Abstract
This article argues that the distinctiveness of biblical law cannot be understood apart from its Christological fulfilment. While scholarship has long recognised formal and substantive differences between Israelite law and other ancient Near Eastern legal collections, these differences form a coherent pattern only when viewed as preparation for the incarnation, life, death, and resurrection of Christ. The article examines six features distinguishing biblical law from its ancient Near Eastern counterparts: direct divine speech, covenantal structure, subordination of kingship, narrative integration, motive clauses, and grounding in divine character. Each feature anticipates and requires a fulfilment that the Old Testament itself cannot provide. The God who speaks the law must enter history to interpret it definitively. The God who binds himself by covenant must keep both sides of the covenant. The God who grounds obligation in his own character must embody that character in human flesh. The article engages with Egyptian Ma’at as a potential parallel, arguing that the impersonal nature of cosmic order contrasts fundamentally with the personal, covenantal, historically-active God who ultimately fulfils his own law in Christ.
1. Introduction: The Question Behind the Question
When scholars compare biblical law with the Code of Hammurabi or other ancient Near Eastern collections, they typically ask: What are the similarities and differences? This is a legitimate historical question. But it leaves the deeper theological question unaddressed: Why does it matter?
The Christian answer is that the distinctiveness of biblical law is intelligible only in light of its fulfilment. The law was never an end in itself. It was, as Paul argues, a παιδαγωγός (paidagōgos, ‘guardian’ or ‘tutor’) leading to Christ (Galatians 3:24). Its unique features, when traced to their logical terminus, require a God who does not merely legislate from heaven but enters his own creation to do what the law could not do (Romans 8:3).
This article therefore examines the distinctiveness of biblical law not as an antiquarian exercise but as preparation for understanding why the incarnation was necessary and what Christ accomplished in fulfilling the law. The argument proceeds in three movements: first, establishing the genuine differences between biblical law and its ancient Near Eastern context; second, demonstrating that these differences create expectations that the Old Testament itself does not satisfy; third, showing how Christ’s person and work fulfil those expectations.
2. The Mode of Legislation: A God Who Speaks
2.1 The Ancient Near Eastern Pattern
The stele bearing Hammurabi’s laws depicts the king receiving authority from Shamash, the sun god. The prologue describes Hammurabi as one whom the gods ‘named to promote the welfare of the people’ (Roth 1997, p. 76). The laws that follow are Hammurabi’s laws. The god authorises; the god does not speak.
This pattern is consistent across ancient Near Eastern legal collections. The Laws of Ur-Nammu, Lipit-Ishtar, and Eshnunna all present human legislators operating under divine sanction. The deity legitimates; the ruler legislates. As Greenberg observes, ‘In Mesopotamia the gods inspire and approve; they do not command’ (Greenberg 1995, p. 28).
2.2 The Sinaitic Difference
‘And God spoke all these words, saying...’ (Exodus 20:1). The Decalogue is presented as direct divine speech. Alt’s distinction between casuistic law (common throughout the ancient Near East) and apodictic law (concentrated in Israel) remains illuminating, even if subsequent scholarship has qualified his claim of absolute uniqueness (Alt 1966, pp. 103-171; Boecker 1980, p. 191). The apodictic ‘you shall not’ presupposes a speaker addressing a hearer. It is relational language.
2.3 The Christological Fulfilment
A God who speaks creates an expectation: What does he really mean? Every speaker can be misunderstood. Interpretation proliferates. The Pharisaic tradition developed elaborate hermeneutical methods precisely because the speaking God’s words required application to situations Moses never envisioned.
Christ’s advent resolves this tension. ‘You have heard that it was said... but I say to you’ (Matthew 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32, 33-34, 38-39, 43-44). Jesus does not abolish the law but interprets it with an authority that surpasses Moses. He can do this because he is the Logos through whom the law was given (John 1:1-3, 17). The Word who spoke at Sinai now speaks in person, closing the gap between divine intention and human understanding.
As John’s Gospel frames it: ‘The law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known’ (John 1:17-18). The God who spoke the law has now exegeted himself (ἐξηγήσατο, exēgēsato, ‘has made him known’ or ‘has interpreted’).
3. The Covenantal Framework: A God Who Binds Himself
3.1 Treaty Form and Theological Innovation
Mendenhall’s influential study demonstrated structural parallels between the Sinaitic covenant and second-millennium Hittite suzerainty treaties: preamble, historical prologue, stipulations, deposit clause, witnesses, blessings and curses (Mendenhall 1955; Lucas 1976, p. 19). The scholarly consensus accepts this formal parallel while debating the precise dating and provenance.
The theological innovation lies in the application. ‘Israel was the only Near Eastern culture to describe its relationship with the divine in this manner’ (Coogan 2001, p. 115). A political instrument governing relations between human kings becomes the vehicle for articulating Yahweh’s relationship with his people.
3.2 The Problem of Covenant Failure
The covenant creates a problem. Suzerainty treaties included curses for infidelity. Deuteronomy 27-28 elaborates these curses at length: disease, drought, defeat, exile, and death. The historical prologue of redemption (’I brought you out of Egypt’) demands a response of faithful obedience. But what happens when the vassal fails?
The Old Testament narrative is largely a record of covenant failure. Israel breaks the covenant repeatedly. The golden calf incident occurs before Moses even descends from Sinai (Exodus 32). The period of the judges cycles through apostasy, oppression, crying out, deliverance, and renewed apostasy (Judges 2:11-19). The monarchy produces occasional reformers but systemic failure. The prophets announce coming judgement. Exile arrives as covenant curse fulfilled.
3.3 The Christological Resolution
The covenant structure creates an insoluble problem: How can a holy God maintain covenant with a faithless people without either compromising his holiness or destroying the people?
The New Testament presents Christ as the resolution. He is both the faithful covenant Lord and the faithful covenant servant. In his humanity, he renders the perfect obedience Israel never rendered. In his divinity, he bears the covenant curses Israel deserved. The suzerainty treaty finds its fulfilment in a suzerain who becomes vassal, who keeps both sides of the covenant, who absorbs the curse in his own body so that the blessing might flow to those who failed.
‘Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”’ (Galatians 3:13). The covenant curses of Deuteronomy 27-28 are exhausted on the cross. The new covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34, with law written on hearts rather than stone, is inaugurated in Christ’s blood (Luke 22:20; Hebrews 8:6-13).
4. Kingship Under Law: A King Who Serves
4.1 The Deuteronomic Limitation
Deuteronomy 17:14-20 presents a conception of kingship radically different from ancient Near Eastern norms. The king must be chosen by Yahweh from among the people. He must not accumulate horses, wives, or wealth. Most remarkably, he must write out a personal copy of the Torah and read it ‘all the days of his life... that his heart may not be lifted up above his brothers’ (Deuteronomy 17:18-20).
The king does not create law; he receives it. He is not the source of justice; he is accountable to a transcendent source. The prophetic tradition enacts this understanding when Nathan confronts David (2 Samuel 12) and Elijah confronts Ahab (1 Kings 21). Israel’s kings are judged by a standard they did not make and cannot unmake.
4.2 The Failure of Israelite Kingship
Yet the historical record is one of failure. David commits adultery and murder. Solomon accumulates precisely the horses, wives, and wealth Deuteronomy 17 prohibits (1 Kings 10:26-11:8). The kingdom divides. Northern kings are uniformly condemned; southern kings are mixed. Even the best, like Josiah, cannot reverse the trajectory toward exile.
The messianic hope intensifies as historical kingship fails. The king who will reign in righteousness, who will embody Torah perfectly, who will bring justice to the nations, must come from God in a way the Davidic succession cannot produce from within itself.
4.3 Christ as True King
Christ fulfils the Deuteronomic ideal. He is chosen by God, anointed with the Spirit, humble rather than self-exalting. He does not grasp at power but empties himself (Philippians 2:6-8). He knows the Torah perfectly and fulfils it completely. When tempted in the wilderness, he answers each temptation with Deuteronomy (Matthew 4:1-11).
Most remarkably, he is the king who becomes servant, who washes feet, who gives his life as ransom. The Deuteronomic warning that the king’s heart should not be ‘lifted up above his brothers’ finds its ultimate expression in a king who, ‘though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant’ (Philippians 2:6-7).
5. Law Within Narrative: A Story Seeking Resolution
5.1 The Distinctiveness of Narrative Integration
Hammurabi’s laws stand as a monument, addressing the present ordering of society without reference to cosmic narrative. Biblical law, by contrast, is embedded within a story: creation, fall, patriarchal promise, exodus, covenant, wilderness, conquest, monarchy, exile, return. The laws are given at particular moments within this narrative and derive their meaning from their narrative location.
The Decalogue begins: ‘I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt’ (Exodus 20:2). Law follows redemption. The narrative provides the rationale: Israel must treat sojourners justly because ‘you were sojourners in the land of Egypt’ (Exodus 22:21). Memory shapes ethics.
5.2 The Incompleteness of the Old Testament Narrative
But the Old Testament narrative is incomplete. It ends, in the Christian ordering of the canon, with Malachi’s prophecy of Elijah’s return and the threat of the land being struck with a curse (Malachi 4:5-6). The story has reached exile and partial return, but the promises remain unfulfilled. The new exodus has not occurred. The new David has not arrived. The law has not been written on hearts. The temple’s glory has not been restored.
The law, embedded in this narrative, shares in its incompleteness. Torah points forward to what it cannot accomplish. ‘For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law’ (Galatians 3:21). The law diagnoses sin, restrains evil, and defines righteousness, but it cannot produce the righteousness it demands.
5.3 Christ as Narrative Fulfilment
Christ completes the story. Matthew’s Gospel presents him as the new Moses giving the new law from the mountain (Matthew 5-7), the true Israel passing through the waters and tested in the wilderness (Matthew 3-4), the son of David who is also David’s Lord (Matthew 22:41-46). Luke traces his genealogy to Adam, presenting him as the true human who succeeds where Adam failed (Luke 3:23-38).
The law’s narrative location, within a story of sin and redemption, finds its resolution in one who enters the story, lives under the law, dies under its curse, and rises to inaugurate new creation. The story was always heading here. The law was always pointing forward. ‘Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them’ (Matthew 5:17).
6. Motive Clauses: A God Who Persuades
6.1 The Rhetoric of Reasons
Gemser and Sonsino identified the motive clause as a distinctive feature of biblical law (Gemser 1953; Sonsino 1980). Biblical legislation frequently includes reasons for commands: ‘You shall not wrong a sojourner... for you were sojourners in Egypt’ (Exodus 22:21). ‘Be holy, for I am holy’ (Leviticus 19:2). ‘That your days may be long in the land’ (Exodus 20:12).
As Greenberg argues, this rhetoric reflects a conception of law as education rather than mere coercion: ‘Biblical law is designed to educate the public. Having undertaken to become a holy nation, Israel must be trained to a holy life’ (Greenberg 1995, p. 30). The law addresses persons capable of understanding reasons and responding to moral appeals.
6.2 The Limitation of External Persuasion
Yet persuasion has limits. Reasons can be given; the heart may remain unmoved. The motive clauses assume a hearer capable of empathy, gratitude, and reverence. But what if the heart is stone?
Ezekiel diagnoses the problem: Israel has a ‘heart of stone’ (Ezekiel 11:19; 36:26). Jeremiah agrees: ‘The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick’ (Jeremiah 17:9). The law speaks to persons who cannot, in their own power, receive its words rightly. Motive clauses address the mind; they cannot transform the heart.
6.3 The New Covenant Solution
The new covenant promises what the old covenant’s persuasion could not accomplish: ‘I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts’ (Jeremiah 31:33). This is not external instruction but internal transformation. The Spirit accomplishes what the letter could not: ‘God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do’ (Romans 8:3).
Christ’s death and resurrection make possible the gift of the Spirit. The Spirit writes the law on hearts, produces love as the fulfilment of the law (Romans 13:10), and conforms believers to Christ’s image (Romans 8:29). The motive clauses’ appeal to empathy, memory, and reverence is now enabled by a power working within.
7. Divine Character as Ground: A God Who Embodies
7.1 The Contrast with Egyptian Ma’at
Any claim that biblical law is uniquely grounded in divine character must address Egyptian Ma’at. Assmann’s research demonstrates that Ma’at represented ‘truth, balance, order, harmony, law, morality, and justice’ in Egyptian thought (Assmann 2002, p. 127). Ma’at governed the cosmos and provided the standard for human conduct. The 42 Declarations of Innocence articulated moral standards covering theft, murder, lying, and sexual misconduct (Lichtheim 1973, pp. 124-126).
Egypt thus grounded morality in transcendent order. Ma’at was cosmic, not conventional.
7.2 The Critical Distinction: Personal versus Impersonal
Yet Ma’at was an impersonal principle. Assmann describes it as ‘connective justice,’ the network of right relationships sustaining cosmic and social order (Assmann 2002, p. 128). Ma’at does not speak, act in history, enter covenant, or bind herself by promise. Ma’at simply is.
The Israelite confession differs categorically: ‘I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt’ (Exodus 20:2). This is a personal agent, identified by name, acting in history, initiating relationship. ‘Be holy, for I am holy’ (Leviticus 19:2) grounds obligation in divine character, not impersonal structure.
The difference is epistemological as well as ontological. Impersonal order can be observed; personal character must be disclosed. Israel’s God discloses himself progressively: in creation, in redemption, in law, in prophecy.
7.3 The Incarnation as Ultimate Disclosure
The incarnation is the final and definitive self-disclosure. ‘No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known’ (John 1:18). In Christ, the character grounding the law is not merely declared but embodied.
What does it mean to love the Lord with all your heart? Look at Jesus. What does it mean to love your neighbour as yourself? Look at Jesus. What does it mean to be holy as God is holy? Look at Jesus.
The law commanded righteousness but could not display it. Prophets spoke of righteousness but could not embody it perfectly. Christ lives the law, not as external compliance but as the overflow of who he is. His obedience is not laboured conformity to alien demand but natural expression of perfect union with the Father. ‘I always do what pleases him’ (John 8:29).
The life of Christ thus interprets the law in a way no commentary could. He is the living Torah, the Word made flesh, the character of God walking among us.
8. The Cross: Bearing What the Law Required
8.1 The Law’s Demand and Humanity’s Failure
The law, in its various distinctive features, creates a comprehensive indictment. A God who speaks directly leaves no excuse for ignorance. A covenant structure defines blessing for obedience and curse for disobedience. Subordination of kingship to law ensures that even the powerful are accountable. Narrative integration locates each person within a story of rebellion and consequence. Motive clauses remove the excuse that the command was arbitrary. Grounding in divine character makes violation not merely legal infraction but personal offence.
The cumulative effect is condemnation. ‘By works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin’ (Romans 3:20).
8.2 Christ Under the Law
Christ enters this situation. ‘When the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law’ (Galatians 4:4). He does not stand apart from the law’s demands but submits to them. He is circumcised on the eighth day. He is presented at the temple. He keeps the Sabbath, observes the feasts, pays the temple tax.
His submission to the law is not mere formality. He keeps it perfectly, from within, as the expression of his love for the Father. Where Adam failed, where Israel failed, where every human being has failed, he succeeds. He is the righteous one, the faithful Israelite, the true human.
8.3 The Curse Exhausted
Having kept the law perfectly, he then bears its curse. ‘Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us’ (Galatians 3:13). The covenant curses of Deuteronomy, suspended over every covenant-breaker, fall on him.
The cross is not arbitrary suffering but specifically covenantal. He bears the curse that faithless Israel deserved. He absorbs the wrath that law-breaking humanity earned. He exhausts the penalty so that the blessing might flow to those who had only curse coming to them.
The resurrection vindicates his sacrifice. The curse has been fully borne; it has no further claim. He rises as the firstfruits of new creation, the inaugurator of the new covenant, the one in whom the law is finally and fully fulfilled.
9. The Spirit and the Law Written on Hearts
9.1 The New Covenant Promise
Jeremiah’s new covenant prophecy anticipated what Christ accomplished: ‘I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts’ (Jeremiah 31:33). This is not the abolition of the law but its internalisation. The external code becomes internal disposition.
Ezekiel adds the pneumatological dimension: ‘I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes’ (Ezekiel 36:26-27).
9.2 Pentecost and Beyond
The Spirit is given at Pentecost, fifty days after Passover, the same interval that separated Passover from Sinai. The parallel is deliberate. At Sinai, the law was given externally, accompanied by fire and thunder. At Pentecost, the Spirit is given internally, accompanied by tongues of fire. The new covenant is inaugurated.
The Spirit produces what the law commanded but could not create: love. ‘The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law’ (Galatians 5:22-23). The law pointed to these qualities; the Spirit produces them.
9.3 The Law Fulfilled in Believers
Paul thus speaks of the law being fulfilled in those who walk by the Spirit: ‘in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit’ (Romans 8:4). The law is not destroyed but established (Romans 3:31). Its goal, which was always love (Romans 13:10), is now achieved by the Spirit’s work in believers.
The distinctiveness of biblical law thus culminates in the distinctiveness of Christian existence. Those who are in Christ are not under the law as a covenant of works demanding perfect obedience on pain of death. They are under grace, with the law’s righteous requirement being progressively fulfilled in them by the Spirit’s power.
10. Conclusion: No Other God
The argument of this article can be summarised simply: No other god gave laws like this because no other god is like this.
No other god speaks directly to a people and binds himself to them by covenant. No other god embeds law in a story arcing toward redemption. No other god reveals law as the expression of personal character rather than impersonal structure. No other god subjects kings to the same law he gives to slaves.
And no other god enters history to resolve the problem his law creates.
No other god takes on flesh, lives under his own law, and never breaks it. No other god bears the curse his people earned and exhausts it in his own body. No other god rises from the dead and writes his law on human hearts by his Spirit.
The Egyptians had Ma’at. The Babylonians had Hammurabi. These were genuine achievements, serious attempts to ground society in something beyond raw power. But Ma’at is silent, and Hammurabi is dead. Their systems could stabilise; they could not save.
The Christian claim is that the God who spoke at Sinai has spoken definitively in his Son (Hebrews 1:1-2). The law was his word; Christ is his Word. The law revealed his character; Christ embodies his character. The law demanded righteousness; Christ is our righteousness. The law pronounced curse on the disobedient; Christ became a curse for us. The law could not give life; Christ is the resurrection and the life.
This is why biblical law matters. Not as an antiquarian curiosity or a source for ethical principles extracted from their context, but as the word of the living God who has acted in history to accomplish what the law pointed toward but could not achieve.
The law is not diminished by Christ; it is fulfilled. And in that fulfilment, the distinctiveness of biblical law finds its explanation. It was always meant to lead here. It was always the pedagogue pointing to the Teacher. It was always the shadow cast by the approaching substance.
The substance has come. His name is Jesus. And in him, the law reaches its goal, finds its meaning, and achieves its purpose.
References
Alt, A. (1966) ‘The Origins of Israelite Law’, in Essays on Old Testament History and Religion. Translated by R.A. Wilson. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 79-132.
Assmann, J. (2002) The Mind of Egypt: History and Meaning in the Time of the Pharaohs. Translated by A. Jenkins. New York: Metropolitan Books.
Boecker, H.J. (1980) Law and the Administration of Justice in the Old Testament and Ancient Near East. Translated by J. Moiser. Minneapolis: Augsburg.
Coogan, M.D. (ed.) (2001) The Oxford History of the Biblical World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gemser, B. (1953) ‘The Importance of the Motive Clause in Old Testament Law’, Vetus Testamentum Supplement, 1, pp. 50-66.
Greenberg, M. (1995) ‘Biblical Attitudes Toward Power: Ideal and Reality in Law and Prophets’, in Firmage, E.R., Weiss, B.G. and Welch, J.W. (eds.) Religion and Law: Biblical-Judaic and Islamic Perspectives. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, pp. 101-112.
Kitchen, K.A. and Lawrence, P.J.N. (2012) Treaty, Law and Covenant in the Ancient Near East. 3 vols. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Lichtheim, M. (1973) Ancient Egyptian Literature, Volume I: The Old and Middle Kingdoms. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lucas, E.C. (1976) ‘Covenant, Treaty, and Prophecy’, Themelios, 8(1), pp. 19-23.
Mendenhall, G.E. (1955) Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East. Pittsburgh: Biblical Colloquium.
Roth, M.T. (1997) Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor. 2nd edn. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
Sonsino, R. (1980) Motive Clauses in Hebrew Law: Biblical Forms and Near Eastern Parallels. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 45. Chico, CA: Scholars Press.
Weinfeld, M. (1972) Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School. Oxford: Clarendon Press.