Are only those commandments binding that are explicitly mentioned?
Created:
The Unstated Commandments: Understanding Yeshua's teachings of the Law
In this message, we explore why Yeshua doesn't explicitly list all of God's commandments in the Sermon on the Mount if they are still binding for believers today.
We argue that, based on Jewish hermeneutics, citing a scripture implies the entire context, meaning Yeshua's examples encompass the whole Torah, including the Sabbath commandment, even if not explicitly mentioned.
Why does Yeshua not explicitly name all of God's commandments in the Sermon on the Mount?
In his Jewish New Testament Commentary, David Stern makes a clear statement about the citation of a text in Judaism and the meaning behind it.
On Matthew 5:22, and Matthew 2:6, Stern explains:
"In Judaism the citation of a Scripture text implies the whole context," all Ten Commandments, "not merely the quoted words."
Given this explanation, and considering that Yeshua teaches not only the Ten Commandments, but the totality of Torah and Prophets—ultimately culminating in His reciting the Shema prayer (Love God)—it would suggest that we shall re-think Christian doctrine.
Therefore, the argument of traditional Christian doctrine denying Torah—or at least 1 of the 10 commandments (Shabbat)—because "they are not explicitly mentioned in the New Testament" could be considered flawed.
When following Stern's explanation and Jewish exegesis tradition, and assuming that Yeshua as a Jewish rabbi, and the apostles, were familiar in this custom would have expected their audience to understand that by exemplifying some of the Torah and the Prophets, and some of the Ten Commandments, the audience would understand that it refers to the totality of the context, not just the given examples.
If citing a Scripture text implies a much broader context, including the Oral Torah and centuries of rabbinic interpretation, this would mean that even if a specific commandment isn't explicitly reiterated in every single text, its ongoing relevance is often presumed unless explicitly abrogated or reinterpreted in a way that aligns with the overall tradition.
When Yeshua gives examples from the Torah and Ten Commandments in the Sermon on the Mount (e.g., Matthew 5:17-48), he is understood to be:
- Affirming the Torah: His opening statement
- Intensifying the Torah's Ethical Demands
- Correcting Misinterpretations, Not Abrogating Law
Therefore, from a 1st Century Judeo-Christian standpoint, if Yeshua indeed affirmed the Torah and intensified its meaning, and given the Jewish understanding that citing a part implies the whole context, then the Sabbath, as one of the Ten Commandments and a foundational element of the covenant, as well as the totality of the written Torah as given by God would still be binding, even if not explicitly re-stated in every sermon.
Yeshua's silence on certain laws would not be interpreted as their nullification.