The LAW Paul vs. Jesus

[Original Happy Camper]

I suspect you are getting that language of fulfillment from Matthews but in that passage it says I came to fulfill the law not abolish it. So whatever fulfilling means it can not be understood as meaning to do away with.
Thoughts?

The word Mosaic does not appear in the Bible. It is a gathering I take it of the laws given to Moses by Jesus.
Jesus gave Moses 4 sets of Laws on the Mountain.
Jesus wrote the ten commandments ( Moral or Royal law) with his own finger. the other three sets of Laws he dictated to Moses who wrote them down. They are the Dietary, Civil and Ceremonial Laws.
Of these for sets of Laws only the Ceremonial law (sanctuary) could be Fulfilled and was in Jesus Christ. The other laws can only be kept. They are perpetual for man kind.
Cain Killed Able ...Moral Law
Noah told to take clean and unclean animals into the ark... Dietary law.
Rape of Dinah story... Civil law
These examples are before Moses and the laws are still with us to this day. Jesus is the same yesterday as he is today and tomorrow.

 

[redleghunter]

So when Jesus's says not a jot or tittle shall pass away and that he expects his audience to obey even the least of the laws and to teach others to do likewise what does he mean? And does it apply to you today or not?

Space and time.

When Jesus spoke these words He had yet to be crucified, buried and rise again.

Pastor and theologian John Piper once opined people get caught in legalisms by failing to see the Gospels and OT in the shadow of the cross and the light of the empty tomb. (My paraphrasing).

 

[Original Happy Camper]

I forgot the Ceremonial law example.
Abels offering that got him killed.

 

[Athée]

Are you a Jew living under the Old Covenant? There are two commandments that are lifted above all others. Do you understand why?

Great so you are taking the position that the ot laws no longer apply. Fair enough. It seems, moreover that your justification for this, in light of the Matthews passage, is in some way predicated on your understanding of the primacy of those two commandments.
Looking forward to seeing how you flesh this out

 

[Athée]

Space and time.

When Jesus spoke these words He had yet to be crucified, buried and rise again.

Pastor and theologian John Piper once opined people get caught in legalisms by failing to see the Gospels and OT in the shadow of the cross and the light of the empty tomb. (My paraphrasing).

I'm sorry I don't understand your response. It seems to indicate that the injunction to follow the ot laws as found in Matthew, only applied until the crucifixion. How does this comport with Jesus's words in that same passage that his injunction would stand until heaven and earth pass away?

 

[Athée]

I forgot the Ceremonial law example.
Abels offering that got him killed.

Forgive me but I am not sure how this connects to the discussion we are having.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

Forgive me but I am not sure how this connects to the discussion we are having.

See post #42

 

[Athée]

See post #42

I do all this on a phone and can't see the post numbers

 

[Original Happy Camper]

I do all this on a phone and can't see the post numbers

Repost for you
The word Mosaic does not appear in the Bible. It is a gathering I take it of the laws given to Moses by Jesus.
Jesus gave Moses 4 sets of Laws on the Mountain.
Jesus wrote the ten commandments ( Moral or Royal law) with his own finger. the other three sets of Laws he dictated to Moses who wrote them down. They are the Dietary, Civil and Ceremonial Laws.
Of these for sets of Laws only the Ceremonial law (sanctuary) could be Fulfilled and was in Jesus Christ. The other laws can only be kept. They are perpetual for man kind.
Cain Killed Able ...Moral Law
Noah told to take clean and unclean animals into the ark... Dietary law.
Rape of Dinah story... Civil law
These examples are before Moses and the laws are still with us to this day. Jesus is the same yesterday as he is today and tomorrow.

 

[Winken]

Lots of good questions there.
We talked about some of that, arguing that the states dark was not only the following of the letter of the law but also it's intent such that following the deeper intent you could not fail to also follow the letter of the law.
We asked what could it mean to be required to follow all the law in the absence of the temple.
We didn't talk about the mosaic angle but we did ask what the law is. Specifically if a Jewish person at the time of Moses had lived 100% perfectly according to the law given them, would he have been sinless and enter heaven (not that the Jews conceived of heaven the same way Christians do today necessarily). Likewise we wondered if someone today managed somehow to live perfectly by the law would they still need Jesus's (we all agreed this is not possible but explored it as a thought experiment).
Thanks for the questions.

The Abrahamic Covenant introduced redemption for the whole of the Hebrew folk by Grace through Faith. They rejected it. The Mosaic Law introduced incredibly difficult policies, rules, regulations, procedures, along with rulers who thought that it was up to them to demand obedience in accordance with their decrees. Their requirements, based upon Mosaic Law, were far too stringent. Few complied, and 99% of the compliance was heretical.

Because of the struggle with the Jewish leadership to accept Grace through Faith, the Law was imposed. Because they declined to follow, or drastically modified the Law, God sent Jesus, once again offering salvation by Grace through Faith, this time one person at a time, not as a people group. That's where we are today. Romans 10:8-13, Romans 8:1.

 

[AJTruth]

Hey it's the atheist again asking a question that came up in my bible study group this week (yes it is a Christian bible study group).

We were talking about how to harmonize Paul and Jesus and we got to talking about obeying the ot law.
Our group was split with some saying that Jesus intended his injunction to follow all the ot laws for Jews only and others saying it should be read to apply to all believers (although not as a salvation issue)

What says you? What are your most compelling arguments for each interpretation and where do you come down?

 

[AJTruth]

Jesus was born under the law, kept & preached the Law. When Jesus speaks in Matt. He is obviously still alive. So, the Old (Levitical) Covenant was still in effect.

Matt 15:24 He came for the lost sheep of Israel (Jews Only) However, the Jew's reject & have him killed

Gal 4:
4 When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law

5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons
(HE COMES TO REDEEM THOSE WHO ARE UNDER THE LAW)

Now, Jesus die's (a sin sacrifice for all mankind ) on the cross.
Matthew 27:51 the Temple veil is ripped in two. Old Levitical Covenant Ends the moment Jesus dies

At Jesus Resurrection! The New Covenant Begins!

Until then the Old Covenant "The Law by Works" still applied

When Pentecost had fully come, 50 days after His resurrection (see acts 2:1)

Footnote: 1500 years earlier, at the first Pentecost. On Mt Sinai, when Moses gave the Law the Nation of Israel was born. And 3000 souls DIED because of sin!

Acts 2:4 Now when Pentecost had fully come, 50 days after His resurrection the Holy Spirit fills the believers. The Christian Church is born 3000 Souls SAVED!

 

[Winken]

Using 'fulfill" in your Bible study discussions may lead to rabbit holes.

Instead ask the group "has anyone ever followed the Law perfectly?" The answer should be "Jesus Christ."

Then show them the last verse of Matthew 5. It says "be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect."

That's the standard. Perfection.

We access His perfection by His righteousness :

But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: (1 Corinthians 1:30)

To fulfill God's promise to the Jews Jesus came, "filled full of; incorporating," every aspect of the Law. HE became the Law. He took it to the Cross in the long-intended act of Grace for everyone on earth. The Key? Romans 10:8-13. The Sustainer? Romans 8:1.

 

[Winken]

OK so what does this mean for you in regards to weather or not Christians today should be trying to follow the OT laws, not as a matter of salvation, but as a matter of obedience and in the attempt (though bound to fall short) of living a life pleasing to God? Jesus said after the sermon on the mount that his audience was to follow all the ot laws and teach others to do the same. Does this apply to you today? Why or why not?

To whom was Jesus speaking in the Sermon on the Mount? To whom was His teaching applicable? Read it from that perspective.

 

[redleghunter]

I'm sorry I don't understand your response. It seems to indicate that the injunction to follow the ot laws as found in Matthew, only applied until the crucifixion. How does this comport with Jesus's words in that same passage that his injunction would stand until heaven and earth pass away?

I believe I may have answered that in an earlier post. The one which asked what unfulfilled laws remain?

 

[Winken]

Yes they are protestants
You said Jesus doesn't seem to care about the minutae of the law but I disagree. In that verse he says it a jot or tittle will pass away and that he expects the audience to obey even the least of the commandments and teach others to do the same.
Thoughts?

The audience was the Hebrew folk. Not one jot or tittle will pass away until the end of the Millennial Reign. That references the Kingdom of God on earth, with Jesus on the Throne of David.

 

[Winken]

He also said he expected his audience in Matthew to obey all the law and to teach others to do the same until heaven and earth pass away. By perfectly obeying the two summary commands it seems that you would be also obeying all the law as well.
But more importantly does this apply to you today? Why or why not?

Does not apply to Christians today.

 

[Athée]

Repost for you
The word Mosaic does not appear in the Bible. It is a gathering I take it of the laws given to Moses by Jesus.
Jesus gave Moses 4 sets of Laws on the Mountain.
Jesus wrote the ten commandments ( Moral or Royal law) with his own finger. the other three sets of Laws he dictated to Moses who wrote them down. They are the Dietary, Civil and Ceremonial Laws.
Of these for sets of Laws only the Ceremonial law (sanctuary) could be Fulfilled and was in Jesus Christ. The other laws can only be kept. They are perpetual for man kind.
Cain Killed Able ...Moral Law
Noah told to take clean and unclean animals into the ark... Dietary law.
Rape of Dinah story... Civil law
These examples are before Moses and the laws are still with us to this day. Jesus is the same yesterday as he is today and tomorrow.

Neat so you believe that major portions of it still apply, how do you make sense of Ephesians 2:15?

 

[Athée]

The Abrahamic Covenant introduced redemption for the whole of the Hebrew folk by Grace through Faith. They rejected it. The Mosaic Law introduced incredibly difficult policies, rules, regulations, procedures, along with rulers who thought that it was up to them to demand obedience in accordance with their decrees. Their requirements, based upon Mosaic Law, were far too stringent. Few complied, and 99% of the compliance was heretical.

Because of the struggle with the Jewish leadership to accept Grace through Faith, the Law was imposed. Because they declined to follow, or drastically modified the Law, God sent Jesus, once again offering salvation by Grace through Faith, this time one person at a time, not as a people group. That's where we are today. Romans 10:8-13, Romans 8:1.

So why in Matthews does Jesus say to his audience that he expected them to follow all the law until heaven and earth pass away?

 

[Jane_Doe]

I suspect you are getting that language of fulfillment from Matthews but in that passage it says I came to fulfill the law not abolish it. So whatever fulfilling means it can not be understood as meaning to do away with.
Thoughts?

Christ did NOT come to abolish the law-- meaning to throw all of it in the trash. But rather He fulfilled it -- the OT law is satisfied. So yes, it no longer applies and is done away with, but the reasoning is not because He smashed it, but rather He satisfied it.