How Jesus Fulfills the Law and How Jesus Does Not

[John1.12]

Jesus, in the gospels, says he has come to fulfill the law, yet many people object, understandably, that Christians don't keep the laws. Its taken a long time for me to understand how to understand what is going on, and I want to share it. It has to do with the passage of time and cultural losses.

First let me refer to an explanation of the word 'Fulfil' as used in the gospels. It means to imitate, to be an impression of something as a was seal is the impression from a ring. Whatever the Greek Koine word seems like in dictionaries it is not used that way in the gospels, and as evidence I refer you to the tautology of Matthew's use of the word here: Which Old Testament Prophecy Fulfills Luke 24:46-47

There are many hucksters who print things like The Bible Promise Book which promotes the false idea that the gospels prove truth, miracles, God and Christ through completions of predictions. Nothing could be further from the truth! This is not how the gospels work, is not what they are for. Liars have printed such material, whether they are lying to themselves and others I can't say. They are deceivers, caught up in the making of webs to trap flies, not people seeking to make disciples for Jesus. Those who repeat them on stage and refer to them become accomplices in their falsehood whether intentionally or otherwise and bear responsibility for such slovenly work.

This idea of impressions used in the gospels when speaking about fulfilling the law or fulfilling a prophecy comes from multiple directions. First of all there are the wax seals once used on documents long ago. They were an ancient security measure for sending documents to guarantee who the sender was. Once an intricate seal on a letter was broken it was almost impossible to falsify the seal. Therefore you could receive an envelope or crate and with some sense of security know who had sent it by examining its seal and comparing it to another copy that you knew was legitimate. The idea of impressions also comes from the ancient conception of light. Light was considered to be a small copy of the real world which made an impression upon the eye, working much like a wax seal. You saw the light and therefore knew what had happened. This is what to think about when you read the word 'Fulfil' in the gospels -- not miraculous predictions followed by completions.


Disciples of Jesus are not made through devices. They join Christ out of admiration for his works or because they have been convinced inwardly through conscience. Some people can't imagine this, because they believe in convincing arguments and pummeling people about the head, boxing ears. People count heads, but God counts hearts. If the kingdom of God is like a field filled with wheat and tares, then some people are in that field not knowing what they are. It is a sad and empty lie to believe we are followers of Christ and instead to be artificers of traps, arguments with which to catch men. These are not God's traps but our own, so those we catch are caught not in Christ's name but in our own name. We become rivals with God, not God's representatives.

Returning to the idea of the impression there is a usage in part of Hebrews 1:3 which appeals to it "The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word." This appeals, like the word 'Fulfil' to the idea of a wax seal but more specifically to the seal of light upon one's eye. The writer implies that The Son is the seal that something is from God. He is in effect claiming that we (who are not Jews) have now received a message sealed by the God of the Jews whereas before we could only read such a message 2nd hand by way of the Jews, through their prophecies and their filters. Everything about the verse is not clear, because it is a verse in a context. The rest of the letter must be read to give it more definition and to limit its meaning, but that is a first poke at the verse meaning.

So when a gospel says Jesus has fulfilled the law what he means is that Jesus has certified its importance, verified its author, not that Jesus has ended it or has finished its use.

Romans 3:31 makes it abundantly clear that the law is still in effect for somebody. The law is spiritual and good (Rom. 7:12, 14), but certainly the New Testament Christian is not under it (Gal. 3:22–26; Rom. 6:14–17; 7:3–6). This brings up a severe problem in what God requires of a Christian, and the modernist makes the matter even more complicated by insisting the “sermon on the mount” is “for” the Christian. Well, “all Scripture is for the Christian,” in the sense that he can learn something from it; but to misapply a passage, doctrinally, through willful ignorance (2 Tim. 2:15), is another matter.

 

[Brickjectivity]

No saved person ( Christian ) is under the law .
Romans 6:14

“For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.”
Col 2
0And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

11¶In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

12Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

13And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

14Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

15And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

We are talking about something, and you appear to be bringing a different favorite subject, perhaps something deserving of its own thread. Certainly its something which would require a change of topic unless you can connect it.

 

[John1.12]

We are talking about something, and you appear to be bringing a different favorite subject, perhaps something deserving of its own thread. Certainly its something which would require a change of topic unless you can connect it.

Just on the purpose of the Law helps.

 

[MatthewA]

Okay, if that is what you are doing okay. I believe it would be a good thing to question if Jesus is telling the truth or not, but if that not important guess it won’t matter to further the discussion.

Context and words are important and believe they should stick around what has been said such in the case of Matthew 5.

In which Jesus Christ never speaks to us directly yet to his disciples and what He had come to do which was fulfil the law, so that believers in Christ can die to that old covenant and move into the new - which is the Law of Christ which is to Love God and Love your neighbor as yourself. Otherwise people today would still be carrying out sacrifices for their sins unto God.

That the only reasonable explanation from according to Christian scriptures about the law.

Fulfillment would be complete, it’s like when you fill up a glass of water to the brim it is filled. Jesus Christ to fulfil the Law of Moses; because no one else could, and by doing so He overcame the World.

It’s like when saying I believe everything the Bible has already been fulfilled in the context of it: that means I believe all the prophecy everything is done and over, including the return of Christ already. Am looked down upon for that, also crazy, and also a heretic. Been through the ringer atleast to know what is like coming up against people with different views.

You believe what you desire about the words and thank you for your time and polite conversation @Brickjectivity. I do not know your overall point about it and did not read entirely your original post,

 

[Brickjectivity]

Okay, if that is what you are doing okay. I believe it would be a good thing to question if Jesus is telling the truth or not, but if that not important guess it won’t matter to further the discussion.

I haven't questioned Jesus integrity, but it is important. You seem to think I'm questioning Jesus integrity.

Context and words are important and believe they should stick around what has been said such in the case of Matthew 5.

In which Jesus Christ never speaks to us directly yet to his disciples and what He had come to do which was fulfil the law, so that believers in Christ can die to that old covenant and move into the new - which is the Law of Christ which is to Love God and Love your neighbor as yourself. Otherwise people today would still be carrying out sacrifices for their sins unto God.

That the only reasonable explanation from according to Christian scriptures about the law.

Fulfillment would be complete, it’s like when you fill up a glass of water to the brim it is filled. Jesus Christ to fulfil the Law of Moses; because no one else could, and by doing so He overcame the World.

That definition of fulfillment is questionable as I've pointed out. The main issue I have with people using this word is that they treat it as something its not. I mentioned the Bible Promise Book which claimed to prove Jesus had done lots of things predicted. It was an abuse of scripture. Jesus performed many signs such as getting onto a colt, but he wasn't completing tasks predicted ahead of time. This matters, particularly if we are concerned about honesty. What about our honesty?

It’s like when saying I believe everything the Bible has already been fulfilled in the context of it: that means I believe all the prophecy everything is done and over, including the return of Christ already. Am looked down upon for that, also crazy, and also a heretic. Been through the ringer atleast to know what is like coming up against people with different views.

I'm sorry if you have been treated as a heretic.

 

[MatthewA]

I haven't questioned Jesus integrity, but it is important.

No one has said that you have; though have asked you do you believe what Jesus Christ had said or not but you continue to not answer that question: If what He was saying was true; it doesn't matter to me if you say yes or no because am not looking for a fixed response but as you said the honesty of the intent.

That definition of fulfillment is questionable as I've pointed out.

Why is it questionable? If someone tells you that they are going to do something for you; do you naturally believe them that they will come and do what was said to you?

For example: A person is behind on a debt; and you as a person who gives loans; fulfils their need by giving money to fulfill the debt so that it cleared; however in this situation a debt is still needed to be fulfilled back to the loaner.

~~ Here is the definition of Fulfil according to the Websters New World Dictionary College Edition ; 1984 c.

fulfill; fulfil: vt. -filled, -filling [ME. fufillen < OE. fullfyllan, a pleonasm (see full and fill);

1. To carry our (something promised; desired, expected, predicted, etc.); cause to be or happen

2. to do (something required); obey

3 to fill the requirements of; satisfy ( a condition) or answer (a purpose)

4. to bring to an end - complete - Syn. Perform -- fulfill ones self : to realizes ones ambitions; potentialities, etc.

The main issue I have with people using this word is that they treat it as something its not. I mentioned the Bible Promise Book which claimed to prove Jesus had done lots of things predicted.

Can you bring forth some of the mentioned Bible Promise Book; and what it claims about itself to so that we can take a look and see ? There are messianic promises that have been promised in and through the old testament, and into the new testament; it takes work to find them though.

 

[Brickjectivity]

No one has said that you have; though have asked you do you believe what Jesus Christ had said or not but you continue to not answer that question: If what He was saying was true; it doesn't matter to me if you say yes or no because am not looking for a fixed response but as you said the honesty of the intent.

Which question? I think I do not understand what you are asking me. I continue not to answer which question? Jesus said the baptism was to fulfill all righteousness. That is directly from Matthew 3:15 I think.

Why is it questionable?

The definition is questionable, because Matthew and Jesus do not use the term according to that definition. Therefore the definition is misunderstood. The way a word is used -- that is its ultimate definition, not what someone writes that it ought to mean. What matters is what Jesus means and what Matthew writes when they use it. That is the only definition to use. That is why I have mentioned all of Matthew's usages.

For example: A person is behind on a debt; and you as a person who gives loans; fulfils their need by giving money to fulfill the debt so that it cleared; however in this situation a debt is still needed to be fulfilled back to the loaner.

If the person has no debt, then there is no need to pay. If I give you money and say "I am paying you back," but I do not owe you and do this seven times then you understand it is a gift and not repayment. The prophets have not predicted, but then Matthew claims fulfillment seven times. (I list six, but there are seven.) Again Jesus says he must be baptized to fulfill righteousness, yet no prophet predicts he must do this. Therefore the word 'Fulfill' in the dictionary does not apply. The scripture is using some different jargon.

Can you bring forth some of the mentioned Bible Promise Book; and what it claims about itself to so that we can take a look and see ? There are messianic promises that have been promised in and through the old testament, and into the new testament; it takes work to find them though.

I do not have a copy, and I think I have mentioned the wrong title. Whatever the title, many books claim and preachers claim we must believe on Jesus because he has completed predictions that prophets made before he was born. They claim this proves he is the messiah, etc. It is manipulative and not how the Christian faith ought to function. We shouldn't live on lies.

 

[Dave Watchman]

So when a gospel says Jesus has fulfilled the law what he means is that Jesus has certified its importance, verified its author, not that Jesus has ended it or has finished its use.

That sounds good to me.

As it was also this same Jesus who said:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.​

If Jesus fulfilled the law, does that mean I'm now free to watch porn videos on the flat screen all day?

Heaven forbid.

How much more severely do you think I would deserve to be dealt with, having trampled the Son of God underfoot, treating as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified me, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?

"Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly 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.​

The Bible definition of sin is transgression of the Law.

So if we go on sinning after having learned the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sin.

I think some are just going to shine brighter in the Kingdom of Heaven than others.

But take heart, even the one called "least" in the Kingdom of Heaven, will still be greater than the greatest of those born of women here.

Peaceful Sabbath.

 

[MatthewA]

Which question? I think I do not understand what you are asking me. I continue not to answer which question? Jesus said the baptism was to fulfill all righteousness. That is directly from Matthew 3:15 I think.


The definition is questionable, because Matthew and Jesus do not use the term according to that definition. Therefore the definition is misunderstood. The way a word is used -- that is its ultimate definition, not what someone writes that it ought to mean. What matters is what Jesus means and what Matthew writes when they use it. That is the only definition to use. That is why I have mentioned all of Matthew's usages.


If the person has no debt, then there is no need to pay. If I give you money and say "I am paying you back," but I do not owe you and do this seven times then you understand it is a gift and not repayment. The prophets have not predicted, but then Matthew claims fulfillment seven times. (I list six, but there are seven.) Again Jesus says he must be baptized to fulfill righteousness, yet no prophet predicts he must do this. Therefore the word 'Fulfill' in the dictionary does not apply. The scripture is using some different jargon.


I do not have a copy, and I think I have mentioned the wrong title. Whatever the title, many books claim and preachers claim we must believe on Jesus because he has completed predictions that prophets made before he was born. They claim this proves he is the messiah, etc. It is manipulative and not how the Christian faith ought to function. We shouldn't live on lies.

Okay.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

....................
So, we can say that Jesus Christ did not fulfill the law, or the prophets ; but what then?
Jesus Christ lied about fulfilling them?
Those are some of my questions and thoughts that come to my mind, what are your thoughts about that?

Matthew 5:17,19 ....'came to fulfill ' corresponds to Jesus words found at Luke 4:21.
The ' Law and the prophets ' refers back to Genesis through Deuteronomy.
Mentioning the 'Law and prophets together' then we can understand to include all of the old Hebrew Scriptures.
Those hate-filled religious leaders think of Jesus as a transgressor ( they had their own ideas about the Law )
Jesus did Not break the Law, he did Not want to rip it up, but fulfilled completing the Law by keeping it perfectly which No one else could.
Thus, because of Jesus the Law is No longer a binding contract on God's people.- Romans 10:4

 

[MatthewA]

@Brickjectivity I agree with you in your post How Jesus Fulfills the Law and How Jesus Does Not

With that the Reformist Concordance or anyone trying to have dominion over another human being using the bible and demanding religion upon them and causing them to have no freedom of thoughts and to question and think for themselves, and can be used as a weapon.

I do not believe that is a good thing at all, because it is abusive, and causes issues in a lot of peoples lives. I do appreciate your time spent talking to me. One thing I like is the truth, and desire other people to at least know what the bible has to say about the truth and use it in a good and respectful manner for the most part for others to think, and question, and ponder for themselves if something that someone may be saying is true or not because it is easy to receive and believe false information at any given time especially on the internet.

Thank you for a moment of your time and you take care friend, and hope all is well for all others.

 

[Neuropteron]

So when a gospel says Jesus has fulfilled the law what he means is that Jesus has certified its importance, verified its author, not that Jesus has ended it or has finished its use.

Hi,

Thank you for the work you put into explaining your premise.

At first I though your spelling of "fulfil" was a typo, however your continual use of "fulfil" and its definition (as you explained) leads me to believe you are referring to something else.

Definition of "fulfill" Webster Dictionary
transitive verb
1a : to put into effect
b : to meet the requirements of (a business order)
c : to measure up to
d : to bring to an end
2a : to develop the full potentialities
b : to convert into reality
This definition is different to to one you are suggesting.

Also the premise that Jesus did not put an end to the law is contrary to a host of bible scriptures that state that the purpose of the Law was "to make transgressions manifest, until the seed should arrive".

The bible points to Christ as the objective that would end the law ("the Christ is the end of the Law") and replace it with a superior covenant that if kept would lead to eternal life.

The Mosaic Law only served as a "shadow of good things to come", and was a fortoken of of the new law that would be replaced by Christ fulfilling it's purpose.
This is why some call it it a "new testament" (NT) in contrast to old testament (NT).

 

[Brickjectivity]

Hi,

Thank you for the work you put into explaining your premise.

At first I though your spelling of "fulfil" was a typo, however your continual use of "fulfil" and its definition (as you explained) leads me to believe you are referring to something else.

Definition of "fulfill" Webster Dictionary
transitive verb
1a : to put into effect
b : to meet the requirements of (a business order)
c : to measure up to
d : to bring to an end
2a : to develop the full potentialities
b : to convert into reality
This definition is different to to one you are suggesting.

Also the premise that Jesus did not put an end to the law is contrary to a host of bible scriptures that state that the purpose of the Law was "to make transgressions manifest, until the seed should arrive".

The bible points to Christ as the objective that would end the law ("the Christ is the end of the Law") and replace it with a superior covenant that if kept would lead to eternal life.

The Mosaic Law only served as a "shadow of good things to come", and was a fortoken of of the new law that would be replaced by Christ fulfilling it's purpose.
This is why some call it it a "new testament" (NT) in contrast to old testament (NT).

There is an explanation that can help with some of the seeming ambiguity. A Christian is part of a new creation, and in faith that creation has been spoken into existence from the Christian's perspective but not from everyone's perspective. For example despite Christ's work being in faith finished now, there is a scripture which says there is a time in the future in which everything will be finished. Is it finished now or in the future? It is finished now to those who are privileged to see it, however they must continue to live in a world where it is not finished.

Not all of the ambiguity is so easy to explain away, but the burden of explanation is not only on me. While you mention "Christ is the end of the law," Paul says that there is much benefit to circumcision -- which is keeping the law! Paul says yes. Paul says no. Which is it? The same Paul attributed with saying Christ is the end of the law says that there is much benefit to circumcision and that the Jews are entrusted with the oracles of God -- as opposed to non-Jews. The implication is that things are not quite so simple. Also Paul continues to obey the law according to Acts. So the ambiguity that you mention is difficult. In Romans 7 he says divorce from the law. Overall he says this, but sometimes he says that. Christians also are charged with keeping parts of the law but not other parts, so how is it the end of the law now, today? Also it may not be the end of the Mosaic law but the end of the gentile laws, particularly since the LORD promises that the Jewish Torah is eternal. It would seem ironic to me if that promise could be erased. The covenant of Noah, however, has an expiration given in Genesis 8:22 which says as long as the earth endures the covenant with Noah does, too; but Christians believe they are in a new creation, implying it may be that law of Noah that Paul believes is done away with but not the Mosaic law.

 

[Clara Tea]

Jesus, in the gospels, says he has come to fulfill the law, yet many people object, understandably, that Christians don't keep the laws. Its taken a long time for me to understand how to understand what is going on, and I want to share it. It has to do with the passage of time and cultural losses.

First let me refer to an explanation of the word 'Fulfil' as used in the gospels. It means to imitate, to be an impression of something as a was seal is the impression from a ring. Whatever the Greek Koine word seems like in dictionaries it is not used that way in the gospels, and as evidence I refer you to the tautology of Matthew's use of the word here: Which Old Testament Prophecy Fulfills Luke 24:46-47

There are many hucksters who print things like The Bible Promise Book which promotes the false idea that the gospels prove truth, miracles, God and Christ through completions of predictions. Nothing could be further from the truth! This is not how the gospels work, is not what they are for. Liars have printed such material, whether they are lying to themselves and others I can't say. They are deceivers, caught up in the making of webs to trap flies, not people seeking to make disciples for Jesus. Those who repeat them on stage and refer to them become accomplices in their falsehood whether intentionally or otherwise and bear responsibility for such slovenly work.

This idea of impressions used in the gospels when speaking about fulfilling the law or fulfilling a prophecy comes from multiple directions. First of all there are the wax seals once used on documents long ago. They were an ancient security measure for sending documents to guarantee who the sender was. Once an intricate seal on a letter was broken it was almost impossible to falsify the seal. Therefore you could receive an envelope or crate and with some sense of security know who had sent it by examining its seal and comparing it to another copy that you knew was legitimate. The idea of impressions also comes from the ancient conception of light. Light was considered to be a small copy of the real world which made an impression upon the eye, working much like a wax seal. You saw the light and therefore knew what had happened. This is what to think about when you read the word 'Fulfil' in the gospels -- not miraculous predictions followed by completions.


Disciples of Jesus are not made through devices. They join Christ out of admiration for his works or because they have been convinced inwardly through conscience. Some people can't imagine this, because they believe in convincing arguments and pummeling people about the head, boxing ears. People count heads, but God counts hearts. If the kingdom of God is like a field filled with wheat and tares, then some people are in that field not knowing what they are. It is a sad and empty lie to believe we are followers of Christ and instead to be artificers of traps, arguments with which to catch men. These are not God's traps but our own, so those we catch are caught not in Christ's name but in our own name. We become rivals with God, not God's representatives.

Returning to the idea of the impression there is a usage in part of Hebrews 1:3 which appeals to it "The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word." This appeals, like the word 'Fulfil' to the idea of a wax seal but more specifically to the seal of light upon one's eye. The writer implies that The Son is the seal that something is from God. He is in effect claiming that we (who are not Jews) have now received a message sealed by the God of the Jews whereas before we could only read such a message 2nd hand by way of the Jews, through their prophecies and their filters. Everything about the verse is not clear, because it is a verse in a context. The rest of the letter must be read to give it more definition and to limit its meaning, but that is a first poke at the verse meaning.

So when a gospel says Jesus has fulfilled the law what he means is that Jesus has certified its importance, verified its author, not that Jesus has ended it or has finished its use.

///////////
Let me understand how you understand how to understand what is going on.
////////////
Brickjectivity: "fulfill means imitate"

Clara Tea: How do you know that fulfill means imitate? Do you know what verse in the bible hints at this? Could it mean something else?
////////////
Brickjectivity: "false idea that the gospels prove truth, miracles, God and Christ through completions of predictions"

Clara Tea: Anyone can poke fun at the beliefs of another, but how do you justify this position?

///////////////
Brickjectivity: "Light was considered to be a small copy of the real world which made an impression upon the eye, working much like a wax seal."

Clara Tea: It still is considered a small copy of the real world (on the retina). So, as I wax nostalgic, their thinking coincides with my own.

//////////////
Brickjectivity: "Disciples of Jesus are not made through devices"

Clara Tea: It is possible that devices made the miracles of Jesus. Walking on water might have been accomplished by placing wooden planks (pontoons) just below the surface of the water.

//////////////
Brickjectivity: "when a gospel says Jesus has fulfilled the law what he means is that Jesus has certified its importance, verified its author."

Clara Tea: Jesus verified the author of the bible, but who verified Jesus? What if Jesus lied?

 

[Clara Tea]

At first I though your spelling of "fulfil" was a typo, however your continual use of "fulfil" and its definition (as you explained) leads me to believe you are referring to something else.

Words and context both change meaning. Yet, there must be an understanding between communication partners for communication to occur. One person has to send signals while the other has to correctly interpret them.

If we are free to continually redefine the lexicon, it would be impossible for anyone to understand.

 

[Clara Tea]

Can you disobey Gravity? No you cannot. In Judaism the laws come with amazing blessings if you follow and amazing damages if you don't

Gravity? Jesus walked on water. Steven Hawking showed that even black holes can evaporate.

God opposes the war in Iraq..."thou shalt not kill" and Revelation predicts dire things because Iraq was attacked.

Hypersonic Missiles: What are they and can they be stopped?

Link: US has subsonic missiles that could easily be shot down, and China and Russia have mach 10 missiles that could not be shot down.

Perhaps this is why God tells us not to start wars that we cannot win?

 

[Faithofchristian]

Jesus, in the gospels, says he has come to fulfill the law, yet many people object, understandably, that Christians don't keep the laws. Its taken a long time for me to understand how to understand what is going on, and I want to share it. It has to do with the passage of time and cultural losses.

First let me refer to an explanation of the word 'Fulfil' as used in the gospels. It means to imitate, to be an impression of something as a was seal is the impression from a ring. Whatever the Greek Koine word seems like in dictionaries it is not used that way in the gospels, and as evidence I refer you to the tautology of Matthew's use of the word here: Which Old Testament Prophecy Fulfills Luke 24:46-47

There are many hucksters who print things like The Bible Promise Book which promotes the false idea that the gospels prove truth, miracles, God and Christ through completions of predictions. Nothing could be further from the truth! This is not how the gospels work, is not what they are for. Liars have printed such material, whether they are lying to themselves and others I can't say. They are deceivers, caught up in the making of webs to trap flies, not people seeking to make disciples for Jesus. Those who repeat them on stage and refer to them become accomplices in their falsehood whether intentionally or otherwise and bear responsibility for such slovenly work.

This idea of impressions used in the gospels when speaking about fulfilling the law or fulfilling a prophecy comes from multiple directions. First of all there are the wax seals once used on documents long ago. They were an ancient security measure for sending documents to guarantee who the sender was. Once an intricate seal on a letter was broken it was almost impossible to falsify the seal. Therefore you could receive an envelope or crate and with some sense of security know who had sent it by examining its seal and comparing it to another copy that you knew was legitimate. The idea of impressions also comes from the ancient conception of light. Light was considered to be a small copy of the real world which made an impression upon the eye, working much like a wax seal. You saw the light and therefore knew what had happened. This is what to think about when you read the word 'Fulfil' in the gospels -- not miraculous predictions followed by completions.


Disciples of Jesus are not made through devices. They join Christ out of admiration for his works or because they have been convinced inwardly through conscience. Some people can't imagine this, because they believe in convincing arguments and pummeling people about the head, boxing ears. People count heads, but God counts hearts. If the kingdom of God is like a field filled with wheat and tares, then some people are in that field not knowing what they are. It is a sad and empty lie to believe we are followers of Christ and instead to be artificers of traps, arguments with which to catch men. These are not God's traps but our own, so those we catch are caught not in Christ's name but in our own name. We become rivals with God, not God's representatives.

Returning to the idea of the impression there is a usage in part of Hebrews 1:3 which appeals to it "The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word." This appeals, like the word 'Fulfil' to the idea of a wax seal but more specifically to the seal of light upon one's eye. The writer implies that The Son is the seal that something is from God. He is in effect claiming that we (who are not Jews) have now received a message sealed by the God of the Jews whereas before we could only read such a message 2nd hand by way of the Jews, through their prophecies and their filters. Everything about the verse is not clear, because it is a verse in a context. The rest of the letter must be read to give it more definition and to limit its meaning, but that is a first poke at the verse meaning.

So when a gospel says Jesus has fulfilled the law what he means is that Jesus has certified its importance, verified its author, not that Jesus has ended it or has finished its use.

As for The Lord Jesus Christ saying in
Matthew 5:17--"Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets, I am not come to destroy but to fulfill"

Now the question arises which law do you suppose Jesus Christ is speaking about..

A lot of people will say it's the
10 commandment law..
But there is no where from
Matthew 5:1 to verse 16...
Jesus Christ never said anything about the
10 commandment law...
So how is it that people comes by the
10 commandment law...When in fact
Jesus Christ never said anything about the
10 commandment law himself.
In Matthew 5:1-16..
There is a law in which Jesus Christ is speaking about and its sure isn't the
10 commandment law either.

A lot of people all they see is the
10 commandment law..
When it comes to the law..

But as it is written in
1 Timothy 1:7--"Desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm,'

So the question is, what law do you suppose Jesus Christ is referring to in Matthew 5:17??

 

[Brickjectivity]

Let me understand how you understand how to understand what is going on.
////////////
Brickjectivity: "fulfill means imitate"

Clara Tea: How do you know that fulfill means imitate? Do you know what verse in the bible hints at this? Could it mean something else?

As used in the gospels. It means to imitate, to be an impression of something as a was seal is the impression from a ring. Here is a list of six uses of 'fulfil' or 'fulfill' in Matthew which show this usage. There is also Matthew 3:15 in addition to these.
How Jesus Fulfills the Law and How Jesus Does Not

Brickjectivity: "false idea that the gospels prove truth, miracles, God and Christ through completions of predictions"

Clara Tea: Anyone can poke fun at the beliefs of another, but how do you justify this position?

///////////////
Brickjectivity: "Light was considered to be a small copy of the real world which made an impression upon the eye, working much like a wax seal."

Clara Tea: It still is considered a small copy of the real world (on the retina). So, as I wax nostalgic, their thinking coincides with my own.

//////////////
Brickjectivity: "Disciples of Jesus are not made through devices"

Clara Tea: It is possible that devices made the miracles of Jesus. Walking on water might have been accomplished by placing wooden planks (pontoons) just below the surface of the water.

A miracle works much like an argument. I believe people convert through knowing righteous people, not through argument. I think an argument can trap people, but it can't convert them. I cannot address this fully in this thread, because I'm unwilling to go off topic to the degree required. What is argument good for? Certain things such as logical reasoning, competition...but not for converting hearts. The basis of conversion is a choice to live like a good person. When we see it, then we can make that choice. When we understand what is good, then we can choose.

Brickjectivity: "when a gospel says Jesus has fulfilled the law what he means is that Jesus has certified its importance, verified its author."

Clara Tea: Jesus verified the author of the bible, but who verified Jesus? What if Jesus lied?

Pauls says the church is the pillar of truth and that his disciples are the witnesses of his ministry. Similarly Jesus disciples are the witnesses of his. How he certifies the law I do not know. I don't know the how there, but maybe I will eventually. I gather that Matthew is building the idea that Jesus is of the 42nd generation that means Israel has finished its purification in the furnace of affliction ", refined like silver."

 

[Brickjectivity]

As for The Lord Jesus Christ saying in
Matthew 5:17--"Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets, I am not come to destroy but to fulfill"

Now the question arises which law do you suppose Jesus Christ is speaking about..

A lot of people will say it's the
10 commandment law..
But there is no where from
Matthew 5:1 to verse 16...
Jesus Christ never said anything about the
10 commandment law...
So how is it that people comes by the
10 commandment law...When in fact
Jesus Christ never said anything about the
10 commandment law himself.
In Matthew 5:1-16..
There is a law in which Jesus Christ is speaking about and its sure isn't the
10 commandment law either.

A lot of people all they see is the
10 commandment law..
When it comes to the law..

But as it is written in
1 Timothy 1:7--"Desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm,'

So the question is, what law do you suppose Jesus Christ is referring to in Matthew 5:17??

There is a concept of seals in Judaism. They say that "Prophecy is sealed." What do they mean? Do they mean that it has ended, or do they mean the canon is complete? I think they mean the canon of prophecy is verified, fixed, never to be changed. They have since had prophets. Similarly what if around Jesus time the Jews were having a crisis of doubts about the Torah. I don't know, and am just pondering what Jews of the time were pondering. Perhaps the arguments or stories or experiences in Matthew are intended to seal the Torah.

By that time of Jesus the Jew's country had been owned by foreigners for over two centuries. That's a long time to be under oppression! Ponder. Could you look back at two centuries of your people being treated as aliens in their own town and not have your ideals tested? Here you are, being graceful under fire, doing your best to hold it together and keep the law under Greek then Roman rule. They tax you. They rape your daughters. They steal your sons for the army, but you are following the law best you can. Why have the Romans not been driven out? These people may have been wondering if they were doing something wrong....which is to say they must have been wondering if the law was somehow not being practiced properly. The blessings and curses in Deuteronomy (11:29) state that if they are following the law then they'll be blessed not oppressed, but they are oppressed. This may have cast doubt upon the law for people living in that time, and perhaps Matthew refers to this when he implies Jesus seals the law.

 

[Faithofchristian]

There is a concept of seals in Judaism. They say that "Prophecy is sealed." What do they mean? Do they mean that it has ended, or do they mean the canon is complete? I think they mean the canon of prophecy is verified, fixed, never to be changed. They have since had prophets. Similarly what if around Jesus time the Jews were having a crisis of doubts about the Torah. I don't know, and am just pondering what Jews of the time were pondering. Perhaps the arguments or stories or experiences in Matthew are intended to seal the Torah.

By that time of Jesus the Jew's country had been owned by foreigners for over two centuries. That's a long time to be under oppression! Ponder. Could you look back at two centuries of your people being treated as aliens in their own town and not have your ideals tested? Here you are, being graceful under fire, doing your best to hold it together and keep the law under Greek then Roman rule. They tax you. They rape your daughters. They steal your sons for the army, but you are following the law best you can. Why have the Romans not been driven out? These people may have been wondering if they were doing something wrong....which is to say they must have been wondering if the law was somehow not being practiced properly. The blessings and curses in Deuteronomy (11:29) state that if they are following the law then they'll be blessed not oppressed, but they are oppressed. This may have cast doubt upon the law for people living in that time, and perhaps Matthew refers to this when he implies Jesus seals the law.

First of all..in case you didn't know..
There two groups of Jews in Israel..

One being the True Jew of Israel,..
And the other Jew is a false Jew trying to steal the true Jews of Israel birth right.

As disciple Paul written in
Romans 9:6--"Not as though the word of God has taken none effect, for they are not all Israel, which are of Israel"

The false Jews of Israel are the ones that had The Lord Jesus Christ crucified..

In Israel there is only two tribes left in Israel.
The tribe of Israel and the tribe of Judah.
The other 10 tribes broke away from Israel and went over the Caucasus mountains and settled in what is called today..
The European countries.

As written in
James 1:1--"James are servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the 12 tribes which are scattered abroad greetings"

So here we find the 12 tribes of Israel.
Which 10 of the tribes of Israel broke away from Israel and were scattered abroad..

Have you any clue or idea where those
10 tribes of Israel are at in the world?
It's easy to find out where exactly those
10 tribes are at in the world..