Christ Fulfilled the Law?

[ydoaPs]

I've been talking about this for ages. ESPECIALLY within the context of the rest of Matthew it is clear here that Jesus did not yet fulfill the Law. Jesus, according to the author of Matthew, you are saved through works.

[naz]

Great topic Zan. Is this the work of "Theoretical BS"?

What he talks about is the basis for the modern Nazorean movement I was a part of (from which the s/n Nazorai derives).

The entire idea that Christ "fulfilled the Law" by dying on the cross is preposterous and has no scriptural support whatsoever.

BUT, there is much more that needs to be looked at. Just a brief outline:

1. What was Jesus' true understanding of the Law? It is clear that he had a hugely different view of it than did his religious contemporaries. In fact in the GoJ he most severely distances himself from Jewish law altogether. We also know that the Ebionites who were early followers of Jesus rejected parts of the Law as being priestly corruptions. Is it possible Jesus shared this view?

2. Even if the Law does stand intact what are the obligations of the Law with regard to Jewish and Gentile believers?

3. What effects do Jesus' intensifications of the Law have on its earlier more literal (and primitive) applications?

[ydoaPs]

Nov 27, 2009 18:20:06 GMT naz said:

Great topic Zan. Is this the work of theoretical BS?

No. He's friends with Scott, though. He's got a lot of great videos as well. His YouTube name is DasAmericanAtheist.

The entire idea that Christ "fulfilled the Law" by dying on the cross is preposterous and has no scriptural support whatsoever.

Such is what the rational among us have been saying for ages.

BUT, there is much more that needs to be looked at. Just a brief outline:

1. What was Jesus' true understanding of the Law? It is clear that he had a hugely different view of it than did his religious contemporaries. In fact in the GoJ he most severely distances himself form Jewish law altogether. We also know that the Ebionites who were early followers of Jesus rejected parts of the Law as being priestly corruptions. Is it possible Jesus shared this view?

It's not really fair to mix and match unrelated Gospels. Sure you can do it with Luke and Acts, but not Matthew and John. That'd be like me trying to answer a question by mixing the words of you and SuperSport; you have to take each author what they say. John is so different from Matthew, that it's not even in the same group(Synoptic Gospels); it's the only Gospel, in fact, that has a divine Jesus.

That being said, it is very clear that Jesus's view of the Gospel was very different. He even makes it more strict in Matthew 5.

If you want to make a case of what Jesus thought based on John, that's great; just don't try to make some weird amalgam with Matthew.

2. Even if the Law does stand intact what are the obligations of the Law with regard to Jewish and Gentile believers?

This is a great question. AFAIK, Jesus never talked about the Gentiles(positively, anyway). My understanding is that he was a apocalyptic Jewish reformer.

[naz]

Nov 27, 2009 18:33:30 GMT ydoaPs said:

It's not really fair to mix and match unrelated Gospels. Sure you can do it with Luke and Acts, but not Matthew and John. That'd be like me trying to answer a question by mixing the words of you and SuperSport; you have to take each author what they say. John is so different from Matthew, that it's not even in the same group(Synoptic Gospels); it's the only Gospel, in fact, that has a divine Jesus.

I look at them all simply as sources of information on Jesus' thinking. I look at the synoptics as Jesus' exoteric teaching within the framework of Judaism and the material in John as his esoteric teaching meant for his inner core of disciples--the place where he basically let it all hang out. I do the same thing. If I am in an environment filled with conservative Christians I won't talk the same way I will in a forum like this. My ideas are the same but I will present them differently.

[ydoaPs]

Nov 27, 2009 18:48:28 GMT naz said:

My ideas are the same but I will present them differently.

What if they're not the same?

[naz]

Nov 27, 2009 18:50:36 GMT ydoaPs said:

Nov 27, 2009 18:48:28 GMT naz said:

My ideas are the same but I will present them differently.

What if they're not the same?

I mean my own ideas are the same in both venues. Not the same as the people I'm talking to.

[ydoaPs]

Nov 27, 2009 18:56:42 GMT naz said:

Nov 27, 2009 18:50:36 GMT ydoaPs said:

What if they're not the same?

I mean my own ideas are the same in both venues. Not the same as the people I'm talking to.

I meant the ideas presented in the gospels. I assumed your "same ideas" carried over in your analogy. What if the ideas in the synoptic vs John aren't just worded differently, but are different entirely?

[naz]

Nov 27, 2009 19:03:23 GMT ydoaPs said:

Nov 27, 2009 18:56:42 GMT naz said:

I mean my own ideas are the same in both venues. Not the same as the people I'm talking to.

I meant the ideas presented in the gospels. I assumed your "same ideas" carried over in your analogy. What if the ideas in the synoptic vs John aren't just worded differently, but are different entirely?

Possible but I have no good reason to think that. It is possible to connect the dots.

[revnkev]

Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive.

I fail to see which laws will not be fulfilled if one walks in perfect love?

[naz]

Dec 10, 2009 19:14:11 GMT revnkev said:

Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive.

I fail to see which laws will not be fulfilled if one walks in perfect love?

How about the laws which say you have to kill people for violating some of the laws?

[revnkev]

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

To fulfill the law is not the same as doing away with the law.

How about the laws which say you have to kill people for violating some of the laws?

This is part of how Christ fulfilled the law but sacrificing himself in their place because humanly it is not possible to obey and follow the law.

I am interested in your reasoning of why the law exists?

[naz]

To fulfill the law is not the same as doing away with the law.

Agreed.

How about the laws which say you have to kill people for violating some of the laws?

This is part of how Christ fulfilled the law but sacrificing himself in their place because humanly it is not possible to obey and follow the law.

Jewish law is not that hard to follow. Orthodox Jews do it every day. What is hard is following Jesus' commandments.

I am interested in your reasoning of why the law exists?

I'm not really sure. It's hard to posit it is a purely human invention. But I also have trouble thinking it all comes from God. It definitely served/serves a purpose in maintaining the distinctness of the Jewish people.

[ydoaPs]

Dec 10, 2009 19:34:57 GMT revnkev said:

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

To fulfill the law is not the same as doing away with the law.

And Jesus didn't do either. In fact, he made the Law more strict and at the same time said when he will fulfill the Law. He said to follow the letter of the Law until he fulfills it when Heaven and Earth pass away. He will do away with the Law when he fulfills it, he just hasn't done it yet.

This is part of how Christ fulfilled the law but sacrificing himself in their place

He didn't. He will fulfill it in the second coming. Jesus taught very explicitly on works salvation(at least according to the author of Matthew).

[revnkev]

Dec 10, 2009 19:43:49 GMT ydoaPs said:

Dec 10, 2009 19:34:57 GMT revnkev said:

To fulfill the law is not the same as doing away with the law.

And Jesus didn't do either. In fact, he made the Law more strict and at the same time said when he will fulfill the Law. He said to follow the letter of the Law until he fulfills it when Heaven and Earth pass away. He will do away with the Law when he fulfills it, he just hasn't done it yet.

This is part of how Christ fulfilled the law but sacrificing himself in their place

He didn't. He will fulfill it in the second coming.

Jesus taught very explicitly on works salvation(at least according to the author of Matthew).

I need scripture references for interpretation.

[ydoaPs]

Dec 10, 2009 19:57:08 GMT revnkev said:

Dec 10, 2009 19:43:49 GMT ydoaPs said:

And Jesus didn't do either. In fact, he made the Law more strict and at the same time said when he will fulfill the Law. He said to follow the letter of the Law until he fulfills it when Heaven and Earth pass away. He will do away with the Law when he fulfills it, he just hasn't done it yet.
He didn't. He will fulfill it in the second coming.

Jesus taught very explicitly on works salvation(at least according to the author of Matthew).

I need scripture references for interpretation.

For which part?