How did Jesus fulfil the law and the prophets?

[ananda]

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." Matthew 5:17

For example, a popular Christian site states "Jesus’ purpose was to establish the Word, to embody it, and to fully accomplish all that was written ... the holy standard of the Law would be perfectly upheld by Christ, the strict requirements personally obeyed, and the ceremonial observances finally and fully satisfied ..."

It is obvious that Jesus could not have observed all of the strict requirements of the law to fulfil and satisfy them, since, for example, many of the laws applied only to women.

 

[eleos1954]

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." Matthew 5:17

For example, a popular Christian site states "Jesus’ purpose was to establish the Word, to embody it, and to fully accomplish all that was written ... the holy standard of the Law would be perfectly upheld by Christ, the strict requirements personally obeyed, and the ceremonial observances finally and fully satisfied ..."

It is obvious that Jesus could not have observed all of the strict requirements of the law to fulfil and satisfy them, since, for example, many of the laws applied only to women.

Jesus IS God. The law was given to mankind who are comprised of both men and women ... and Jesus (God) was on earth in the form of a man, still fully God.

The law describes who He is .... His perfect character.

I would encourage you to study His Word for yourself to gain understanding ... rather than rationalizing your own thoughts.

 

[zephcom]

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." Matthew 5:17

For example, a popular Christian site states "Jesus’ purpose was to establish the Word, to embody it, and to fully accomplish all that was written ... the holy standard of the Law would be perfectly upheld by Christ, the strict requirements personally obeyed, and the ceremonial observances finally and fully satisfied ..."

It is obvious that Jesus could not have observed all of the strict requirements of the law to fulfil and satisfy them, since, for example, many of the laws applied only to women.

My take on it goes like this:

The law represents a covenant or contract between God and the Tribes of Israel. It would be similar to one's mortgage contract. When one fulfills their responsibility under the contract, it expires. I suspect that what Jesus was saying is that it was not His intention to destroy the contract between God and the Jews. Rather He fulfilled all the contractual obligations Jews were responsible for and the contract expired.

He then established His own commandments as a contract between Him and rest of humanity. In doing that, He said that His Two Great Commandments were the 'hooks' that all of the Law and the Prophet's teachings hung from.

IOWs, He reestablished all of the Law and the Prophets as a higher level of spirituality where humans were no longer given a checklist of things to do. Rather they were expected to use the two commandments as a guide for any and every situation they encounter.

 

[cloudyday2]

It is obvious that Jesus could not have observed all of the strict requirements of the law to fulfil and satisfy them, since, for example, many of the laws applied only to women.

You could say that Jesus fulfilled the laws applying to women if the laws have the form: "If you are a woman then blah blah blah". To use a software analogy, a program can execute according to its code (law) without necessarily exercising every branch. To fully test the code you would want to exercise every branch, but there is nothing unlawful in not exercising every branch. For Jesus to violate the laws applied to women he would need to be a woman and not follow them IMO.

 

[ananda]

Jesus IS God. The law was given to mankind who are comprised of both men and women ... and Jesus (God) was on earth in the form of a man, still fully God.

The law describes who He is .... His perfect character.

What is the relationship between his character and fulfillment of the law?

I would encourage you to study His Word for yourself to gain understanding ... rather than rationalizing your own thoughts.

I have studied the Bible extensively - I served as an apologetics teacher in my past life as a Christian.

 

[ananda]

My take on it goes like this:

The law represents a covenant or contract between God and the Tribes of Israel. It would be similar to one's mortgage contract. When one fulfills their responsibility under the contract, it expires. I suspect that what Jesus was saying is that it was not His intention to destroy the contract between God and the Jews. Rather He fulfilled all the contractual obligations Jews were responsible for and the contract expired.

He then established His own commandments as a contract between Him and rest of humanity. In doing that, He said that His Two Great Commandments were the 'hooks' that all of the Law and the Prophet's teachings hung from.

IOWs, He reestablished all of the Law and the Prophets as a higher level of spirituality where humans were no longer given a checklist of things to do. Rather they were expected to use the two commandments as a guide for any and every situation they encounter.

How exactly were those "contractual obligations" fulfilled by Jesus?

 

[ananda]

You could say that Jesus fulfilled the laws applying to women if the laws have the form: "If you are a woman then blah blah blah". To use a software analogy, a program can execute according to its code (law) without necessarily exercising every branch. To fully test the code you would want to exercise every branch, but there is nothing unlawful in not exercising every branch. For Jesus to violate the laws applied to women he would need to be a woman and not follow them IMO.

In your view, non-violation rather than performance satisfies the requirement for fulfillment, then?

 

[cloudyday2]

In your view, non-violation rather than performance satisfies the requirement for fulfillment, then?

Yes. Any time a law is applicable you apply it to your life and you have fulfilled the law IMO.

 

[zephcom]

How exactly were those "contractual obligations" fulfilled by Jesus?

The Bible doesn't say. I think that each individual should decide for themselves whether they think Jesus had the authority to fulfill those obligations based on who they think Jesus was.

 

[eleos1954]

What is the relationship between his character and fulfillment of the law?

I have studied the Bible extensively - I served as an apologetics teacher in my past life as a Christian.

character is:

the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual. (in this case God)

It is who He is ... He created the law ... It is impossible for him not to fulfill or abide by His own laws.

Hebrews 6

17So when God wanted to make the unchanging nature of His purpose very clear to the heirs of the promise, He guaranteed it with an oath.

18Thus by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be strongly encouraged

so, if something we study seems like contradiction ... it is not God being contrary or "lying" ... it is our lack of understanding and therefore we need to study further.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." Matthew 5:17

For example, a popular Christian site states "Jesus’ purpose was to establish the Word, to embody it, and to fully accomplish all that was written ... the holy standard of the Law would be perfectly upheld by Christ, the strict requirements personally obeyed, and the ceremonial observances finally and fully satisfied ..."

It is obvious that Jesus could not have observed all of the strict requirements of the law to fulfil and satisfy them, since, for example, many of the laws applied only to women.

Answering this question would require us to try to understand (hermeneutically) the mind of "Matthew," the author, as he puts words to parchment in order to represent what Christ said. This, in turn, will require us to see how Matthew demonstrates this "fulfillment" motif throughout the rest of his specific gospel, as he understood it.

We're not just going to sit here, read this one verse alone, and think and act as if can we somehow justifiably extricated this singular verse from its multiple context(s) in the passage in which it is found, or from the rest of the entire gospel for that matter, and assume "we can decipher this correctly"!

C'mon folks! Look at the overall literary pattern the author of "Matthew" provides in the whole gospel, then draw a conclusion, one that isn't anachronistically evaluated by today's standards of writing. Matthew demonstrates the fulfillment throughout his gospel, but not in an obviously direct or comprehensive way that we'd try to do today.

 

[ananda]

Yes. Any time a law is applicable you apply it to your life and you have fulfilled the law IMO.

It seems that the Biblical authors could've then used a more exact & precise term that speaks of "non-transgression" rather than fulfillment.

 

[ananda]

character is:

the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual. (in this case God)

It is who He is ... He created the law ... It is impossible for him not to fulfill or abide by His own laws.

Hebrews 6

17So when God wanted to make the unchanging nature of His purpose very clear to the heirs of the promise, He guaranteed it with an oath.

18Thus by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be strongly encouraged

so, if something we study seems like contradiction ... it is not God being contrary or "lying" ... it is our lack of understanding and therefore we need to study further.

Do you apply that same standard when studying the claims of the deities of other religions?

 

[ananda]

Answering this question would require us to try to understand (hermeneutically) the mind of "Matthew," the author, as he puts words to parchment in order to represent what Christ said. This, in turn, will require us to see how Matthew demonstrates this "fulfillment" motif throughout the rest of his specific gospel, as he understood it.

We're not just going to sit here, read this one verse alone, and think and act as if can we somehow justifiably extricated this singular verse from its multiple context(s) in the passage in which it is found, or from the rest of the entire gospel for that matter, and assume "we can decipher this correctly"!

C'mon folks! Look at the overall literary pattern the author of "Matthew" provides in the whole gospel, then draw a conclusion, one that isn't anachronistically evaluated by today's standards of writing. Matthew demonstrates the fulfillment throughout his gospel, but not in an obviously direct or comprehensive way that we'd try to do today.

Where are the hermeneutical guidelines that we must follow in order to properly interpret these things in the Bible?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Where are the hermeneutical guidelines that we must follow in order to properly interpret these things in the Bible?

If hermeneutical guidelines don't "exist" somewhere, whether as a whole or in a confluence of fragmentary realizations regarding human communication..... then I'm not sure I can even understand your question.

 

[eleos1954]

Do you apply that same standard when studying the claims of the deities of other religions?

I don't "study" other religions per se in depth. However, do not believe in polytheism ... nor do I believe in reincarnation, so no real reason for me to study them in depth.

One chooses what they believe ... I believe in the Christian God.

 

[Barney2.0]

Christ fulfilled the law in the way it applied to him as a Jewish man under its bondage perfectly because he was without fault and sin. By doing so he fulfilled the law in its entirely because he as a human kept it perfectly in how it applied to him as a Son of Adam in his humanity. So by doing so he fulfilled the law for all of Adam’s children, sons and daughters included. He didn’t need to follow laws that don’t apply to him, but if he fulfilled everything that was required of him 100% and more, then obviously we as his followers men and women no longer need to keep it.

 

[ananda]

If hermeneutical guidelines don't "exist" somewhere, whether as a whole or in a confluence of fragmentary realizations regarding human communication..... then I'm not sure I can even understand your question.

Let me rephrase: What makes the heremeutical guidelines you follow authoritative, if they aren't found in your scriptures?

 

[ananda]

...do not believe in polytheism ... nor do I believe in reincarnation, ...

Perhaps it demonstrates a lack of understanding, and requires the need for further study.

 

[ananda]

... He didn’t need to follow laws that don’t apply to him.

Does it state that in the Bible?