Can Jewish law be fulfilled?

[Flankerl]

it seems he expected all or nothing from adam and eve...they sinned once and were condemned to death

one mistake was all it took. We make many more then just one mistake...and we are all dying too
So what does that all mean in terms of forgiveness? God will forgive us, but we still have to die?

whats the point of the forgiveness? Your scriptures say that when we die we return to the dust and our consciousness ceases... so what good is forgiveness if we still have to die.

Condemned to death? HaShem gave humanity a life. The other option would have been to sit in the golden cage. Forever. Also we probably wouldnt even exist. So you had two "humans" living in gan eden doing nothing, experiencing nothing.... for all eternity.

Also Adam became over 900 years old, lived with his wife, had children, grandchildren, grandgrandchildren and probably made his peace with HaShem as HaShem with him.

I really will never understand this. We are human. Its in our nature to eventually die. Thats it. If you make it out to be some kind of horror thats ok but how about living your life and be glad that you lived it?


I'd rather live a life to experience something than to end up all eternity doing nothing, not knowing anything, etc etc.


Also HaShem in his omnipotence already knew that they would sin before he even made them or even the universe. If he had wanted more worker bees without a free will he would have made more angels.

 

[free spirit]

One is only branded a law breaker if, and only if, one ceased from trying. Making a mistake does not a law breaker make. Falling to temptation a couple of times does not a law breaker make.
You are also deluding yourself: Break the law of men and you will have to pay a fine, or you have to do time in jail, or you can get even executed.
Those who are under the law will be judged by the law, let me tell you this: the law has no mercy.



That's not what Jesus said, but you know... I don't particularly care what Jesus had to say.

Then I will not tell you.

 

[free spirit]

Condemned to death? HaShem gave humanity a life. The other option would have been to sit in the golden cage. Forever. Also we probably wouldnt even exist. So you had two "humans" living in gan eden doing nothing, experiencing nothing.... for all eternity.

Also Adam became over 900 years old, lived with his wife, had children, grandchildren, grandgrandchildren and probably made his peace with HaShem as HaShem with him.

I really will never understand this. We are human. Its in our nature to eventually die. Thats it. If you make it out to be some kind of horror thats ok but how about living your life and be glad that you lived it?


I'd rather live a life to experience something than to end up all eternity doing nothing, not knowing anything, etc etc.


Also HaShem in his omnipotence already knew that they would sin before he even made them or even the universe. If he had wanted more worker bees without a free will he would have made more angels.

Yes... you are correct there is more to God purpose for humanity:
It is mind boggling for He is accually selecting His children through the spirit of His only begotten Son, Jesus, so that we may be fellow heirs of God with Him, in other words the children will be one with God and rule the universe with Him. Isn't that something?

 

[Jeremy Mason]

This is a common Christian belief, that Jesus fulfilled Jewish law. But is that even possible? As in, can anyone fulfill Jewish law?

To me, it simply doesn't sound right.

Who says, Jesus had to fulfill Jewish law?

 

[Harmonious]

You are also deluding yourself: Break the law of men and you will have to pay a fine, or you have to do time in jail, or you can get even executed.
Those who are under the law will be judged by the law, let me tell you this: the law has no mercy.

There is a difference between the way God judges man, and the way humans are supposed to judge each other in a court of law.

I thought that it was obvious that "God's ways are not our ways," but apparently it isn't.

Then I will not tell you.

Thank you for that.

 

[Harmonious]

Who says, Jesus had to fulfill Jewish law?

Jesus was a Jew. Therefore, he was obligated to fulfill Jewish law, just like every other Jew.

 

[smokydot]

Jeremy, this will give you some background on this thread:

The NT letter to the Hebrews taken in the context of the whole letter reports that is exactly what Jesus did.

The letter reports that the law was merely a shadow (representation) of the things that were to come in the NT, that they were not the realites (e.g., effectual atonement
for sin) themselves, that the reality is found in Christ -- Heb 10:1; Col 2:16-17.

Note: I don't defend the NT, I simply present what it reports. Whether you believe it or not is up to you. . .I do.
Nor do I wrestle with the plain words of the NT text, nor do I quibble about their necesessary implications, because they are plain for all to see for themselves.
I take the words at their plain meaning.

So with that in mind, these are some of the fulfillments presented in the letter to the Hebrews.

1) Jesus fulfilled the prefigure in the High Priest -- Heb 7:11-18, 22

2) He fulfilled the prefigure in the sacrifices - -Heb 7:27, 9:6-10, 15b, 28, 10:1-10

3) He fulfilled the prefigure in the cleansing blood of the sacrifices -- Heb 10:14; 1 Jn 1:7

4) He fulfilled the prefigure in the Mediator of the Siniatic covenant (Moses, Ex 20:18-22), 34:10, 27) -- Heb 9:15, 8:6, 7:22

5) He fulfilled the prefigure in putting the Sinaitic covenant into effect through blood
by his putting the New Covenant into effect through his blood (Mt:26:28) -- Heb 9:18-26

6) He fulfilled the prefigure in the Passover lamb by being sacrificed on/during the "Passover" (which in NT means Nissan 15/Nissan 15-21) -- 1 Co 5:7

7) The letter to the Hebrews also reports that the Siniatic covenant and old order have been replaced with
the New Covenant and new order -- Heb 7:18-19, 22, 8:7, 13, 9:9-10, 15, 10:9 -- more here ---> http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2313639-post405.html

So it is on the authority of the NT that Christians believe Jesus fulfilled the Jewish Levitical law.

 

[Harmonious]

I like Flankerl's answer, but I'll add my own two cents.

it seems he expected all or nothing from adam and eve...they sinned once and were condemned to death

one mistake was all it took. We make many more then just one mistake...and we are all dying too
So what does that all mean in terms of forgiveness? God will forgive us, but we still have to die?

Yup.

I'm surprised that you don't see the silliness of your own question. Even if you believe you have the "forgiveness" that is supposed to be available because of Jesus, you are forgiven, but you still have to die? What does THAT mean, in terms of forgiveness?

The answer always given is that forgiveness is guaranteed in the World to Come. But God granted that long before there was a Jesus. Jesus, as far as the concept of God's forgiveness of humanity is concerned, is pointless.

God set up two perfectly well functioning covenants with humanity: one with Noah, and one with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and their children, the Jews.

Jesus was thereby irrelevant, unless you choose to MAKE him relevant. I still don't see the function he would have for you, as God and man already HAVE a relationship that is devoid of the need for Jesus.

But if your belief system incorporates what I see as a useless feature as its primary function, that is your lookout.

whats the point of the forgiveness? Your scriptures say that when we die we return to the dust and our consciousness ceases... so what good is forgiveness if we still have to die.

Just because the World to Come isn't mentioned in Jewish scriptures, it doesn't mean that we don't believe in it. Rather, our main focus is THIS world, right here.

Please tell me that you don't honestly believe that Jesus was the first person to have come up with the idea of an afterlife.

 

[Harmonious]

Jeremy, this will give you some background on this thread:

The NT letter to the Hebrews taken in the context of the whole letter reports that is exactly what Jesus did.

The letter reports that the law was merely a shadow (representation) of the things that were to come in the NT, that they were not the realites (e.g., effectual atonement
for sin) themselves, that the reality is found in Christ -- Heb 10:1; Col 2:16-17.

Note: I don't defend the NT, I simply present what it reports. Whether you believe it or not is up to you. . .I do.
Nor do I wrestle with the plain words of the NT text, nor do I quibble about their necesessary implications, because they are plain for all to see for themselves.
I take the words at their plain meaning.

So with that in mind, these are some of the fulfillments presented in the letter to the Hebrews.

1) Jesus fulfilled the prefigure in the High Priest -- Heb 7:11-18, 22

2) He fulfilled the prefigure in the sacrifices - -Heb 7:27, 9:6-10, 15b, 28, 10:1-10

3) He fulfilled the prefigure in the cleansing blood of the sacrifices -- Heb 10:14; 1 Jn 1:7

4) He fulfilled the prefigure in the Mediator of the Siniatic covenant (Moses, Ex 20:18-22), 34:10, 27) -- Heb 9:15, 8:6, 7:22

5) He fulfilled the prefigure of putting the Sinaitic covenant into effect through blood
by his putting the New Covenant into effect through his blood (Mt:26:28) -- Heb 9:18-26

6) He fulfilled the prefigure in the Passover lamb -- 1 Co 5:2

7) The letter to the Hebrews also reports that the Siniatic covenant and old order have been replaced with
the New Covenant and new order -- Heb 7:18-19, 22, 8:7, 13, 9:9-10, 15, 10:9 -- more here ---> http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2313639-post405.html

So it is on the authority of the NT that Christians believe Jesus fulfilled the Jewish Levitical law.

And for that same token, Jeremy, Jews believe the letter of Hebrews is nonsense, and that Jesus has not fulfilled the law any more than any other Jew.

Perhaps quite a bit less, as he had sinned grievously. Yes, the Christian scriptures said otherwise, but they also outline in detail where Jesus DID sin.

 

[Flankerl]

Yes... you are correct there is more to God purpose for humanity:
It is mind boggling for He is accually selecting His children through the spirit of His only begotten Son, Jesus, so that we may be fellow heirs of God with Him, in other words the children will be one with God and rule the universe with Him. Isn't that something?

Yeah yeah Jesus Jesus Jesus Jesus Jesus Jesus Jesus. Have fun with that.

 

[fallingblood]

Who says, Jesus had to fulfill Jewish law?

He stated that he was here not to abolish the law and prophets, but to fulfill them.

 

[fallingblood]

Jesus was a Jew. Therefore, he was obligated to fulfill Jewish law, just like every other Jew.

That just made something snap in my brain. Now thinking about it, the actual message was probably that Jesus was saying that he, being a Jew, was going to fulfill the laws as well. It makes sense in context as he expands on following the laws.

Later on, Christians, completely ignorant of Jewish custom, and not willing to actually follow the law, decided that Jesus must have been saying something else.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

That just made something snap in my brain. Now thinking about it, the actual message was probably that Jesus was saying that he, being a Jew, was going to fulfill the laws as well. It makes sense in context as he expands on following the laws.

Later on, Christians, completely ignorant of Jewish custom, and not willing to actually follow the law, decided that Jesus must have been saying something else.

That depends on how ignorant Paul was of Jewish custom - which if you don't know already - has been a subject of debate for quite a while.

But certain sects of Jews have, like Paul and the early Christians, seen a need to re-interpret and re-invent Judaism for some reason or another. Christianity just outlasted all their other first century counterparts, primarily because it split off from Judaism even (IMHO) before the NT was completed.

 

[fallingblood]

That depends on how ignorant Paul was of Jewish custom - which if you don't know already - has been a subject of debate for quite a while.

But certain sects of Jews have, like Paul and the early Christians, seen a need to re-interpret and re-invent Judaism for some reason or another. Christianity just outlasted all their other first century counterparts, primarily because it split off from Judaism even (IMHO) before the NT was completed.

Point taken.

 

[smokydot]

That depends on how ignorant Paul was of Jewish custom - which if you don't know already - has been a subject of debate for quite a while.
But certain sects of Jews have, like Paul and the early Christians, seen a need to re-interpret and re-invent Judaism for some reason or another.

Paul, the "Hebrew of Hebrews," the Pharisee (Phil 3:5) could be ignorant of Jewish custom?
Man! . .the only ignorance here is yours. . .have you even read the whole NT? . .and I'm not talking about understanding it, just reading it, for cryin' out loud.

The NT reports that Jesus himself was the reason for "re-interpreting" or "re-inventing" Judaism, in giving the true meaning of Jewish Scripture, the basis for Judaism, when

1) he explained who he was by Jewish Scripture -- Lk 24:25-27,
2) he presented himself to the Jews as the fulfiller of Jewish Scripture -- Jn 5:39-40, 46-47, and
3) he opened their minds so they could understand "everything which must be fulfilled that is written about him in the Law of Moses, the Prophets
and the Psalms" -- Lk 24 44-48.

And then Jesus personally revealed to Paul these things. . .and more. . .that Paul was not permitted even to tell -- 2 Co 12:1-4, 7; Gal 1:11-12; Eph 3:3-5.

There is absolutely no basis in the NT for these latter day, man-made, novel speculations that Paul and the NT writers "had seen a need to re-interpret or re-invent Judaism," when it is Jesus himself who gives the true meaning of Jewish Scripture, the basis of Judaism.

The meaning which Jesus explained was always contained in the prophecies, although hidden,
and was always contained in the "shadows" (representations) of the Mosaic law.
They were nothing new. . .nor are they a "re-invention" or a "re-interpretation" of Judaism.

According to Jesus, they are the true Judaism.

Christianity just outlasted all their other first century counterparts, primarily because it split off from Judaism even (IMHO) before the NT was completed.

What a low view of God's revelatory will, and of his revelation in Jesus Christ. . .that neglects to attribute orthodox Christianity to God himself,
rather viewing it "primarily" as the result of "splitting off" from Judaism. . .your grasp of the NT is non-existent.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Paul, the "Hebrew of Hebrews," the Pharisee (Phil 3:5) could be ignorant of Jewish custom?
Man! . .the only ignorance here is yours. .

I realize that this is of little benefit to you, but I didn't say that Paul was ignorant of Jewish custom.

 

[smokydot]

I realize that this is of little benefit to you, but I didn't say that Paul was ignorant of Jewish custom.

True. . .but you said it had been a subject of debate for quite a while (which could only be among those ignorant of the NT). . . and you allowed for its possibility. . .
which is just as ludicrous.

This is the first to-the-point response you've made in quite a while. . .keep it up!

 

[angellous_evangellous]

True. . .but you said it had been a subject of debate for quite a while (which could only be among those ignorant of the NT). . . and you allowed for its possibility. . .
which is just as ludicrous.

This is the first to-the-point response you've made in quite a while. . .keep it up!

No for you - in your chaotic mess of a thought world - NOT saying something implies whatever you want, no matter how unrelated.

And when someone doesn't say something, you then have the right to berate them as if they did...

THIS is why you shouldn't insult people. It makes you look like a donkey, and a dishonest one to boot. You certainly are dishonest, but you look more like a monkey when you through your poo at stuff that doesn't exist.

 

[smokydot]

That just made something snap in my brain. Now thinking about it, the actual message was probably that Jesus was saying that he, being a Jew, was going to fulfill the laws as well. It makes sense in context as he expands on following the laws.

And here we have an example of how novel speculations are hatched from insufferable ignorance of the NT.

What about fulfilling the Prophets, as in prophecies. . .he said he came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets (Mt 5:17). . . did all Jews seek to fulfill the prophecies?

Later on, Christians, completely ignorant of Jewish custom, and not willing to actually follow the law, decided that Jesus must have been saying something else.

Yeah, right. . .the only one saying "something else" is you, with your novel speculation, newly hatched. . .it ain't Jesus, or the Christians.

 

[smokydot]

No for you - in your chaotic mess of a thought world - NOT saying something implies whatever you want, no matter how unrelated.
And when someone doesn't say something, you then have the right to berate them as if they did...
THIS is why you shouldn't insult people. It makes you look like a donkey, and a dishonest one to boot. You certainly are dishonest, but you look more like a monkey when you through your poo at stuff that doesn't exist.

Show the error or falsehood in my words: "neglects to attribute orthodox Christianity to God himself, rather viewing it "primarily" as the "splitting off" from Judaism."

@ http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2320452-post535.html -- at the end of the post.

Them's your words, not mine. . .I simply prosecuted them.

For what one neglects to say on a point can reveal as much as what one does say, in for example,
showing one's reference points on the matter--novel speculation, or the NT reports,

and what one does say ("primarily" because it split off) can exclude the possibility of what one neglected to say (primarily because it was from God).

I'm sure you didn't intend for all that to be evident, but nevertheless, it is there.

What you said revealed that your reference point was novel speculation, rather than the NT reports,
and the "primary" reason you stated, for the existence of orthodox Christianty today as being its "splitting off" from Judaism,
does not allow for the NT reports that God was the cause thereof.

When your reference point for the NT becomes the NT reports, rather than latter-day novel speculations regarding it, our disagreements on NT matters will be tremendously reduced.