Was the Apostle Paul Actually a Heretic?

Paul tells us in Romans 10:4 that “Christ is the end of the law”.  What on Earth did Paul mean by this?  In Deuteronomy 13:4 mankind is instructed to walk after our Heavenly Father and keep his commandments, cleaving to Him:

Deuteronomy 13:4
(4)  Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him.
 
The next verse says that no matter what signs and wonders are shown by a person, if that one draws us away from the instructions of verse 4 he is to be killed: 

Deuteronomy 13:5
(5)  And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.
 
This death sentence is presumably because the man drawing one away from God’s ways and His Law is a heretic regarding the doctrinal instructions established by God himself in verse 4. 
 
HERETIC – anyone who does not conform to an established doctrine, or principle.

If Paul tells us that the advent of Christ brought an end to God’s Law, then was he not teaching us to overthrow the instructions of Deuteronomy 13:4?  It appears that he would not only be heretical in his personal belief system, but he would be instructing others in his heresy.  Not only would he be usurping the words of God recorded by Moses, but he would also be discounting the words by Y’shua (Jesus) Himself:

Matthew 5:17
(17)  Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
 
Fulfill is the Greek word Strong’s G4137 – (pleroo) – cause to abound, render full and complete, execute, perform; fill to the top, to full measure, wanting nothing; consummate; carry into effect; carry out, accomplish, render perfect in every detail.  Now if Y’shua was our example, would this not give us the understanding we need to follow in His footsteps?  Did He accomplish this so we could be free to ignore it all?  If Paul was actually teaching that God’s Law no longer applies today, then he would (by God’s own words) be a heretic, and we should immediately stop reading anything more he has to say.

In many of today’s pulpits, pastors preach that Old Testament Law no longer applies in a New Testament era.  In the past when we read the Bible superficially, we likewise thought Paul’s words seemed to present such thoughts, and it was very troubling to us because teaching against God’s Law is heretical per Deuteronomy.  It was a conundrum that had to be resolved, or we felt we must discount all of Paul’s writings in order be right with our Father in Heaven.  After a great deal of studies, we have come to concur with others that have found that Paul never intended his words to be interpreted in this manner.  Actually, the very principles and structuring of God’s Truth would never allow for such an interpretation.

Translations are never perfect, and our English word “end” had created a spin that caused the confusion.  When we studied the passage as it was originally written, the meaning became clear to us.  The word “end” in this passage is the Greek word Strong’s G5056 (telos) - eternal; aim or purpose.  Rather than eliminating the Law, Y’shua provided the fullness of its aim or purpose for our example, and eternalized it.

Once we became aware that the Father’s Law was not supposed to be ripped from our Biblical text and thrown away during the New Testament era, we had to confront many other passages in Paul’s epistles as well.  “Look at what he says here!” we’d say.  “Where does he GET that???”  “HORRORS!”  “How are we supposed to deal with what he says there?” 

Can any of you out there identify with these sentiments?  We know now that all of Scripture is supposed to interlock harmoniously, but how are we supposed to rationalize Paul’s writings to the rest of Scripture?  What are we to do with some of Paul’s words? 

To get to the root of all that, we need to study a little bit more about this man – about how he related to his audience and what comprised the platform of doctrinal Truth he stood on.  We have a new two-part series on the Short Articles page titled Paul’s Paradox.  We think you just might enjoy it.