Actually, he was referring to the 'law', by which he meant the six
hundred or so religious rules by which the devout lived. Or was he?
You see, he openly ridiculed the behaviour of some of the Pharisees in
their legalistic interpretations of the 'law.' When the lawyer
'tempted' him, the man is asked what the law says. The response is the
summary that Gamaliel or Hillel would have given...a summary of the
"spirit" of the law, not its legalisms. And Christ approved of that.
This is the man, remember, who deliberately broke sabbath observances
to make a point! And elsewhere subverted the regulation, as in the
woman taken in adultery, or the parable of the Good Samaratian.
He 'fulfils' the law with a New Covenant. The old legalisms are
redundant. Most Christians believe that (apart from some religious
nutters).
Dr. Barry Worthington