Did Jesus ABOLISH the Mosaic Law?

[tonychanyt]

That depends on what you mean by abolish.

Moses' Law separated Jews from the Gentiles.

Jesus predicted the destruction of the temple in Matthew 24:

2 he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down [G2647].”

thrown down
καταλυθήσεται (katalythēsetai)
Verb - Future Indicative Passive - 3rd Person Singular
Strong's 2647: From kata and luo; to loosen down, i.e. to demolish.

Strong's Greek: 2647. καταλύω (kataluó) — 17 Occurrences

Jesus predicted the temple would be G2647-demolished or broken down or dismantled.

This same Greek word was used earlier. Jesus declared in Matthew 5:

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish [G2647] the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Jesus did not H2647-dismantle the Law, but the physical Jerusalem temple would be H2647-dismantled. The demolition of the temple was a sign that Jesus fulfilled the Law. The temple was no longer necessary to reach the LORD.

Paul added in Ephesians 2:

14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15a by abolishing [G2673] in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees.

This is a different κατα-word.

by abolishing
καταργήσας (katargēsas)
Verb - Aorist Participle Active - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's 2673: From kata and argeo; to be entirely idle

Strong's Greek: 2673. καταργέω (katargeó) — 27 Occurrences

HELPS Word-studies:

2673 katargéō (from 2596 /katá, "down to a point," intensifying 691 /argéō, "inactive, idle") – properly, idle down, rendering something inert ("completely inoperative"); i.e. being of no effect (totally without force, completely brought down); done away with, cause to cease and therefore abolish; make invalid, abrogate (bring to nought); "to make idle or inactive".

By his sacrifice on the cross in the flesh, Jesus G2673-abolished or idled down the Law and did not G2647-demolish it.

15b He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace

In Christ, there is no more distinction between Jews and Gentiles. There is only one new humanity.

16 and reconciling both of them to God in one body through the cross, by which He extinguished their hostility.

In Christ, there is no partition between Jews and Gentiles and there is no partition between men and God. Now, everyone can approach God through the sacrifice of Christ.

Instead of abolished, Berean Literal Bible uses:

having annulled in His flesh the law of commandments in ordinances, so that He might create in Himself the two into one new man, making peace,

Did Jesus abolish Moses' law?

Because the meanings of καταλύω and vκαταργέω overlap, I am not even against people who say that Jesus abolished the Law so long as they understand that Jesus did not dismantle the Law into fallen pieces as the Romans did to the Temple in 70 AD. In any case, Jesus did abolish the partition between Jews and Gentiles, and between men and God, by fulfilling the Law and the Prophets.

Paul explained in Acts 13:

39 Through him [Jesus] everyone who believes is set free from every sin, a justification you were not able to obtain under the law of Moses.

and in Romans 10:

4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

Bottom line, Hebrews 8:

13 In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

For me, the Mosiac Law is not destroyed but is annulled.

 

[Soyeong]

The Bible often uses the same terms to describe the nature of God as it does to describe the nature of God's instructions, such as with them being holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), and with justice, mercy, and faithfulness being weightier matters of the Mosaic Law (Matthew 23:23), which is because it is God's instructions for how to act in accordance with His nature. The only way to nullify instructions for how to act in accordance with God's nature is by nullifying God. For example, the only way to nullify the fact that it is in accordance with God's righteousness to do charity is if God is no longer righteous.

You can interpret God's word as promoting rebellion against God if you want, but you don't have to. For example, in Romans 10:4, while the Greek word "telos" can mean "end", it can also mean "purpose" or "goal" and even "end" can mean "intention or aim", so saying that Jesus is the goal of the law means something completely different from how you are choosing to interpret that verse.

 

[Unqualified]

We are not responsible for the law of Moses.

 

[tonychanyt]

The only way to nullify instructions for how to act in accordance with God's nature is by nullifying God.

verse?

 

[Soyeong]

verse?

That is straightforwardly true, as I have an example of.

 

[Soyeong]

We are not responsible for the law of Moses.

God you is sovereign, so we are all under His law and are obligated to refrain from sin.

 

[Unqualified]

God you is sovereign, so we are all under His law and are obligated to refrain from sin.

We are not under the law. We are required to love. The leading of the HS shows us how as @tonychanyt has said. We are not subject to obey the ceremonial law. Just the Ten Commandments. We do not the penalties of the law.
it is toothless. Jesus did not the sabbath because He is Lord of the sabbath. Messianic Judaism’s and judaizers demand the law. The apostles laid no such burden on us. That’s the law, that’s the church the latest edition. You are parallel and off a little you shouldn’t condemn Christians over not following the law or the sabbath.

 

[Soyeong]

We are not under the law. We are required to love.

While I agree that we are not under the law, Paul described the law that we are not under in Romans 6:14 as being a law where sin had dominion over us, which does not describe the Law of God, which is a law where holiness, righteousness, and goodness have dominion over us (Romans 7:22), but rather it is the law of sin where sin had dominion over us. Furthermore, in Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and in Romans 3:20, it is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of what sin is, so we are still under the Mosaic Law, but are not under the law of sin. In addition, everything in the Mosaic Law is either in regard to how to love God and how to love our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on it, so the position that we are required to love is the position that we are under the Mosaic Law.

The leading of the HS shows us how as @tonychanyt has said. We are not subject to obey the ceremonial law. Just the Ten Commandments.

In Ezekiel 36:26-27, the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the Mosaic Law. The Bible never lists which laws are part of the ceremonial law and never even refers to that as being a category of law. If a group of people were to list which laws they though were ceremonial laws, then there would be a wide variety of lists and none of those people should interpret the authors of the Bible as referring to a list of laws that they just created. For example, some people think that everything but the Ten Commandments are ceremonial laws, which would include laws against things like rape, kidnapping, favoritism, and the greatest two commandments, while the position that we just need to obey the Ten Commandments means that we are free to not follow those laws.

We do not the penalties of the law.
it is toothless.

In Romans 8:1, there is now therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ, and in 1 John 2:6, those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked, so there is only no condemnation for those who are walking in obedience to the Mosaic Law. The reason why there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ is because he gave himself to pay the penalty for our sins, which should make us want to go and sin no more, not consider ourselves free to do what God has revealed to be sin through the Mosaic Law.

Jesus did not the sabbath because He is Lord of the sabbath.

That is contradictory. The way that we choose to live testifies about who Christ is, so the way believe that Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath is by keeping the Sabbath holy while the way to deny that he is Lord of the Sabbath is by refusing to keep it holy.

Messianic Judaism’s and judaizers demand the law. The apostles laid no such burden on us. That’s the law, that’s the church the latest edition. You are parallel and off a little you shouldn’t condemn Christians over not following the law or the sabbath.

Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example and the problem that Paul had with the Judaizers was not that they were teaching Gentiles how to follow Christ, but that they were wanting to require Gentiles to become circumcised in order to become saved. The Apostles should not be interpreted as essentially ruling that Gentiles shouldn't follow Christ. We can't follow Christ by refusing to follow what he taught. Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, and the Mosaic Law is how his audience knew what sin is, so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of the Kingdom.