Jesus Fulfilled the Law. But What Does That Mean?

[ThyKingdomComeSoon]

In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”
What does this mean? What is the relationship between Jesus’ teaching and the Old Testament? Three ideas require definition here.
The phrase “the Law or the Prophets” is a common way of referring to the Old Testament, Israel’s Bible in Jesus’ day. The “Law” comprised the first five books of the OT, and the “Prophets” captured the rest (see also Luke 24:27).
The word “abolish” means “invalidate.” Jesus did not come to “do away with” or “repeal” the OT.1 Jesus respected the authority of the Law and the Prophets.

The word “fulfill” is the hinge on which the meaning of this verse turns. While it’s tempting to read this as a reference to Jesus’ obedience to the law, the verb translated “fulfill” did not mean “obey.” Rather, the word “fulfill” meant to bring to a designed goal, to fill up and complete, to bring to full expression. Jesus was declaring that he fulfilled the prophecies and even the patterns of Scripture; he showed forth their true meaning.
This interpretation is consistent with how Matthew uses the word “fulfill” in the opening chapters of his Gospel. Jesus’ virgin birth “fulfills” the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 (Matt 1:22–23) and also “fulfills” the pattern of the expectation of a divine ruler who will bring about God’s salvation (Isa 7–12). The slaughter of the innocents under Herod “fulfills” the pattern established in Jeremiah 31:15 when the mothers of Israel wept at Judah’s exile (Matt 2:17–18).
Matthew writes that Jesus’ deliverance from Herod “fulfills” Hosea 11:1, “Out of Egypt I called my son” (2:15). In Hosea’s original context, that sentence is just a historical statement referring to the Exodus. How then does Jesus fulfill it? Because Jesus fulfills the historical pattern of God rescuing his “Son” from danger (see Exod 4:22). The same could be said of the wordplay in Matthew 2:23: Jesus’ humble origins in Nazareth fulfill the OT theme of the Messiah’s humble origins (e.g., Isa 11:1).
Therefore, Jesus fulfills the specific prophecies of the Old Testament, and he also fulfills the storyline of the whole OT. That is why he represents Israel when he is baptized and then, like Israel, goes into the wilderness—though, unlike Israel, not because of disobedience. No, Christ perfectly obeys in our place. Like Moses going up Mount Sinai, Jesus “goes up on the mount” to deliver his famous Sermon on the Mount. Jesus is a new Moses. He has come to show how he “fulfills” the OT story in and by himself.
Jesus therefore has the authority to interpret the Old Testament and its laws, which is just what he goes on to do in Matthew 5:21–48. He hasn’t come to invalidate the Mosaic law, but to show where it was always pointing.
Jesus fulfills—fills out—the entire OT.

Article from Richard Winston link; https://www.logos.com/grow/jesus-fulfilled-the-law-but-what-does-that-mean/

Blessings

 

[seekingthemindofChrist]

In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”
What does this mean? What is the relationship between Jesus’ teaching and the Old Testament? Three ideas require definition here.
The phrase “the Law or the Prophets” is a common way of referring to the Old Testament, Israel’s Bible in Jesus’ day. The “Law” comprised the first five books of the OT, and the “Prophets” captured the rest (see also Luke 24:27).
The word “abolish” means “invalidate.” Jesus did not come to “do away with” or “repeal” the OT.1 Jesus respected the authority of the Law and the Prophets.

The word “fulfill” is the hinge on which the meaning of this verse turns. While it’s tempting to read this as a reference to Jesus’ obedience to the law, the verb translated “fulfill” did not mean “obey.” Rather, the word “fulfill” meant to bring to a designed goal, to fill up and complete, to bring to full expression. Jesus was declaring that he fulfilled the prophecies and even the patterns of Scripture; he showed forth their true meaning.
This interpretation is consistent with how Matthew uses the word “fulfill” in the opening chapters of his Gospel. Jesus’ virgin birth “fulfills” the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 (Matt 1:22–23) and also “fulfills” the pattern of the expectation of a divine ruler who will bring about God’s salvation (Isa 7–12). The slaughter of the innocents under Herod “fulfills” the pattern established in Jeremiah 31:15 when the mothers of Israel wept at Judah’s exile (Matt 2:17–18).
Matthew writes that Jesus’ deliverance from Herod “fulfills” Hosea 11:1, “Out of Egypt I called my son” (2:15). In Hosea’s original context, that sentence is just a historical statement referring to the Exodus. How then does Jesus fulfill it? Because Jesus fulfills the historical pattern of God rescuing his “Son” from danger (see Exod 4:22). The same could be said of the wordplay in Matthew 2:23: Jesus’ humble origins in Nazareth fulfill the OT theme of the Messiah’s humble origins (e.g., Isa 11:1).
Therefore, Jesus fulfills the specific prophecies of the Old Testament, and he also fulfills the storyline of the whole OT. That is why he represents Israel when he is baptized and then, like Israel, goes into the wilderness—though, unlike Israel, not because of disobedience. No, Christ perfectly obeys in our place. Like Moses going up Mount Sinai, Jesus “goes up on the mount” to deliver his famous Sermon on the Mount. Jesus is a new Moses. He has come to show how he “fulfills” the OT story in and by himself.
Jesus therefore has the authority to interpret the Old Testament and its laws, which is just what he goes on to do in Matthew 5:21–48. He hasn’t come to invalidate the Mosaic law, but to show where it was always pointing.
Jesus fulfills—fills out—the entire OT.

Article from Richard Winston link; https://www.logos.com/grow/jesus-fulfilled-the-law-but-what-does-that-mean/

Blessings

I have been going through Matthew's gospel all morning (and I will continue, momentarily), so this was a timely post. I actually spent some time pondering and studying Matthew 2:23 earlier today, so I found that reference especially timely.

Anyway, I suspect that you will set off a firestorm of sorts by what you posted, but it sounds good to me so far.

 

[seekingthemindofChrist]

The “Law” comprised the first five books of the OT, and the “Prophets” captured the rest (see also Luke 24:27).

I know that you quoted somebody else's article, but, just for the sake of clarity, I want to point out that, at times, "the law" has a broader meaning than just the first five books of the Old Testament.

John 10:34

"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?"

This is a quote from Psalm 82:6, and Jesus called it "your law".

John 15:25

"But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause."

This is a quote from Psalm 69:4, which is a Messianic psalm, and Jesus called it "their law".

1 Corinthian 14:21

"In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord."

This is a quote from Isaiah 28:11-12, and Paul called it "the law".

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

Jesus fulfills—fills out—the entire OT.

Thanks for the Great Information - any additional thoughts on these?:

Gal_5:14 "For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even​

in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."​

+

"Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another​

hath fulfilled the law. For this, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt​

not kill, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness, thou shalt​

not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended​

in this saying, namely, thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh​

no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."​

(Romans 13:8-10)​

Amen.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”
What does this mean? What is the relationship between Jesus’ teaching and the Old Testament? Three ideas require definition here.
The phrase “the Law or the Prophets” is a common way of referring to the Old Testament, Israel’s Bible in Jesus’ day. The “Law” comprised the first five books of the OT, and the “Prophets” captured the rest (see also Luke 24:27).
The word “abolish” means “invalidate.” Jesus did not come to “do away with” or “repeal” the OT.1 Jesus respected the authority of the Law and the Prophets.

The word “fulfill” is the hinge on which the meaning of this verse turns. While it’s tempting to read this as a reference to Jesus’ obedience to the law, the verb translated “fulfill” did not mean “obey.” Rather, the word “fulfill” meant to bring to a designed goal, to fill up and complete, to bring to full expression. Jesus was declaring that he fulfilled the prophecies and even the patterns of Scripture; he showed forth their true meaning.
This interpretation is consistent with how Matthew uses the word “fulfill” in the opening chapters of his Gospel. Jesus’ virgin birth “fulfills” the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 (Matt 1:22–23) and also “fulfills” the pattern of the expectation of a divine ruler who will bring about God’s salvation (Isa 7–12). The slaughter of the innocents under Herod “fulfills” the pattern established in Jeremiah 31:15 when the mothers of Israel wept at Judah’s exile (Matt 2:17–18).
Matthew writes that Jesus’ deliverance from Herod “fulfills” Hosea 11:1, “Out of Egypt I called my son” (2:15). In Hosea’s original context, that sentence is just a historical statement referring to the Exodus. How then does Jesus fulfill it? Because Jesus fulfills the historical pattern of God rescuing his “Son” from danger (see Exod 4:22). The same could be said of the wordplay in Matthew 2:23: Jesus’ humble origins in Nazareth fulfill the OT theme of the Messiah’s humble origins (e.g., Isa 11:1).
Therefore, Jesus fulfills the specific prophecies of the Old Testament, and he also fulfills the storyline of the whole OT. That is why he represents Israel when he is baptized and then, like Israel, goes into the wilderness—though, unlike Israel, not because of disobedience. No, Christ perfectly obeys in our place. Like Moses going up Mount Sinai, Jesus “goes up on the mount” to deliver his famous Sermon on the Mount. Jesus is a new Moses. He has come to show how he “fulfills” the OT story in and by himself.
Jesus therefore has the authority to interpret the Old Testament and its laws, which is just what he goes on to do in Matthew 5:21–48. He hasn’t come to invalidate the Mosaic law, but to show where it was always pointing.
Jesus fulfills—fills out—the entire OT.

Article from Richard Winston link; https://www.logos.com/grow/jesus-fulfilled-the-law-but-what-does-that-mean/

Blessings

this is a good thoughtful post

did you ever notice that Jesus makes a distinction adding more understanding later ? so Jesus said this

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5:17-18‬ ‭KJV‬‬

also he’s actually saying “ I came to fulfil and nothing will change until it’s fulfilled “ later he explains what he meant better


“And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

( this has focused us on what was going to be fulfilled everything the law and prophets said about the messiah )

Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, (the law and prophets ) and said unto them, Thus it is written, ( in the law and prophets )

and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:


and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭24:44-48‬ ‭KJV‬‬

see Jesus wasn’t ever saying “ I’ve come to obey Moses law “ he’s saying I’ve come to fulfill everything the law and prophets said about me the messiah

when I realized this other things Jesus said made sense like this

“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.


For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?”
‭‭John‬ ‭5:39-40, 45-47‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Jesus is all throughout the ot he’s just hidden the ot is prophetic about him like this that Moses said about Jesus

“I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭18:18-19‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Jesus came to fulfill this and so

“He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.”
‭‭John‬ ‭12:48-50‬ ‭KJV‬‬

And Peter then confirms this when he received the Holy Spirit afterwards

“For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days. Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭3:22-24, 26‬ ‭

The law and prophets foretell the coming of Jesus from his birth to his crucifixion and ascention to the right hand of God is all in the law and prophets Jesus was saying “ I’ve come to bring all those promises to pass in the one they were all talking about hear me and be saved “

 

[ThyKingdomComeSoon]

I have been going through Matthew's gospel all morning (and I will continue, momentarily), so this was a timely post. I actually spent some time pondering and studying Matthew 2:23 earlier today, so I found that reference especially timely.

Anyway, I suspect that you will set off a firestorm of sorts by what you posted, but it sounds good to me so far.

The truth must be told, to me it is important, otherwise what is the point. I am always willing to discuss scripture if you are interested. as for mat 2:23 yes Jesus the messiah the son pf GOD, fulfilled the law by showing it's true meaning imbued with love and compassion contrary to the rigidity and cruelty of the pharisees who he called hypocrites and He fulfilled all proohecies of the messiah as he said , except for the end times prophecy to be fulfilled soon.

Be blessed and good bible studies!

 

[ThyKingdomComeSoon]

I know that you quoted somebody else's article, but, just for the sake of clarity, I want to point out that, at times, "the law" has a broader meaning than just the first five books of the Old Testament.

John 10:34

"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?"

This is a quote from Psalm 82:6, and Jesus called it "your law".

John 15:25

"But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause."

This is a quote from Psalm 69:4, which is a Messianic psalm, and Jesus called it "their law".

1 Corinthian 14:21

"In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord."

This is a quote from Isaiah 28:11-12, and Paul called it "the law".

Excellent point and I agree! thank you!

 

[ThyKingdomComeSoon]

Thanks for the Great Information - any additional thoughts on these?:

Gal_5:14 "For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even​

in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."​

+

"Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another​

hath fulfilled the law. For this, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt​

not kill, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness, thou shalt​

not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended​

in this saying, namely, thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh​

no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."​

(Romans 13:8-10)​

Amen.

what I will explain to you is something I learned the hard way, who to believe and why and what to do in the case of a
discrepancy.

First it is evident that many here come from different denominations, I was raised as a Catholic in the province of Quebec. I do not know all the denominations as there are too many and they all differ in many ways. But I know that catholics and other demonimations do not follow proper scriptures, have twister it's meaning, The Written word of GOD from the Bible should be our PRIMARY source!

Second, as you know there are some differences between the gospel of Paul ( Yes, Paul said he preached HIS own gospel ) and the gospel of Jesus about the good news of the kingdom of heaven. I fear many forget the words of Christ and place Paul words before Jesus's words which is a terrible mistake to make. In the case of a difference in meaning, one must give precedence to the words of the old testament and Jesus, this is a well known fact. I have learned this during my personal bible studies. I am certain of this In case of a discrepancy in meaning, Jesus written word win over Paul's. Jesus came to teach the law the proper way. Are Jesus followers of that time greater than the creator (GOD) of all things?

As for GAl 5:14, It is a teaching of Jesus that the law comes from first, the love of GOD our Father in heaven ( the first 4 commandments) then to again LOVE one another ( the last 6 commandments ) it is close to what jesus was teaching but not quite the same, Paul omitting ( surely not intentionally ) the love for GOD above all else. This is why we must compare to Jesus's teaching and place Jesus teachings first in case of a difference. Again on Rom 13:8-10, no mention to love God First from the first 4 commandments, another unintentional omission?
from Mark chapter 12;

29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

Thank you for these prefect examples in Gal and Rom that validate what I wrote about always putting the words of the Jesus, Messiah first!
Luk 6:39 And he spake a simile to them, 'Is blind able to lead blind? shall they not both fall into a pit?
Luk 6:40 A disciple is not above his teacher, but every one perfected shall be as his teacher.

Blessings!

 

[JohnDB]

Ephesians 2:15
He made of no effect the law consisting of commands and expressed in regulations, so that He might create in Himself one new man from the two, resulting in peace

 

[Fundaamental]

In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”
What does this mean? What is the relationship between Jesus’ teaching and the Old Testament? Three ideas require definition here.
The phrase “the Law or the Prophets” is a common way of referring to the Old Testament, Israel’s Bible in Jesus’ day. The “Law” comprised the first five books of the OT, and the “Prophets” captured the rest (see also Luke 24:27).
The word “abolish” means “invalidate.” Jesus did not come to “do away with” or “repeal” the OT.1 Jesus respected the authority of the Law and the Prophets.

The word “fulfill” is the hinge on which the meaning of this verse turns. While it’s tempting to read this as a reference to Jesus’ obedience to the law, the verb translated “fulfill” did not mean “obey.” Rather, the word “fulfill” meant to bring to a designed goal, to fill up and complete, to bring to full expression. Jesus was declaring that he fulfilled the prophecies and even the patterns of Scripture; he showed forth their true meaning.
This interpretation is consistent with how Matthew uses the word “fulfill” in the opening chapters of his Gospel. Jesus’ virgin birth “fulfills” the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 (Matt 1:22–23) and also “fulfills” the pattern of the expectation of a divine ruler who will bring about God’s salvation (Isa 7–12). The slaughter of the innocents under Herod “fulfills” the pattern established in Jeremiah 31:15 when the mothers of Israel wept at Judah’s exile (Matt 2:17–18).
Matthew writes that Jesus’ deliverance from Herod “fulfills” Hosea 11:1, “Out of Egypt I called my son” (2:15). In Hosea’s original context, that sentence is just a historical statement referring to the Exodus. How then does Jesus fulfill it? Because Jesus fulfills the historical pattern of God rescuing his “Son” from danger (see Exod 4:22). The same could be said of the wordplay in Matthew 2:23: Jesus’ humble origins in Nazareth fulfill the OT theme of the Messiah’s humble origins (e.g., Isa 11:1).
Therefore, Jesus fulfills the specific prophecies of the Old Testament, and he also fulfills the storyline of the whole OT. That is why he represents Israel when he is baptized and then, like Israel, goes into the wilderness—though, unlike Israel, not because of disobedience. No, Christ perfectly obeys in our place. Like Moses going up Mount Sinai, Jesus “goes up on the mount” to deliver his famous Sermon on the Mount. Jesus is a new Moses. He has come to show how he “fulfills” the OT story in and by himself.
Jesus therefore has the authority to interpret the Old Testament and its laws, which is just what he goes on to do in Matthew 5:21–48. He hasn’t come to invalidate the Mosaic law, but to show where it was always pointing.
Jesus fulfills—fills out—the entire OT.

Article from Richard Winston link; https://www.logos.com/grow/jesus-fulfilled-the-law-but-what-does-that-mean/

Blessings

I know what it means 😊

It means Jesus wrote the commandments on the stone tablets 😊

 

[Omegatime]

Yeshua obeyed the regulations of the Law when he walked the earth, and all his teachings came from the prophets and writings to fulfill them and confirm the understanding of end time events

 

[Aaron56]

I wrote this about two years ago. It is a summary about how we are to regard the law as those in Christ.

The covenant that would have made priests and kings of the Jewish people was the the one God made with God, the promise of which was given to Abraham. The covenant at Sinai was between the people present and God. God kept His end of the deal but the Jews did not. This incurred an indebtedness the Jews could not pay therefore, they became slaves: their lives was the only thing they possesed that they could give.

Let's look at Galatians, chapter 4, it's very clear here: Because the Jews were slaves they could never be sons. Remember: Paul is writing to believers in Christ.

Galatians 4 “Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.”

Now note the references to Hagar and Sarah are references in terms of their liberty. Hagar is a slave; Sarah is a free woman, and that sets up the matter of the status of their sons. Abraham’s son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way. That means she could have children, she belonged to Abraham, was a member of his household as a slave, so she could have children to Abraham.
But the son by the free woman was born as a result of promise.

Now I said that the covenant of sonship, which was the first covenant, is between God and God and Abraham was the third party beneficiary, Abraham received the promise but he did not have to keep any part of the deal. This is like when a child shows up in a marriage and is born into a house of godly order. The child benefits from the covenant of marriage but was not part of it.

There was a promise made to Abraham. He was not entitled to sonship; it was a promise that God made to himself, He attached this promise to the lineage of Abraham. So that is the difference: born as a result of promise vs born the natural way.

The passage says "These things may be taken figuratively". When the Bible says you may take something figuratively that is because it intends for you to take it figuratively. So, what's the figure of speech?

The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mt. Sinai. Which covenant is that? Unmistakably this is the law. It was enacted at Mt. Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves. And notice how the references flip:

“Rejoice, O barren,
You who do not bear!

We read this as Sarah because she was a barren woman but let's read on...

Break forth and shout,
You who are not in labor!
For the desolate has many more children
Than she who has a husband.”

Hold on, "she who has a husband" is also Sarah. That is because this is regarding children of promise. Hagar had no right to benefit from the promise of sonship through Abraham, BUT Hagar, representing the barren woman not connected to the spiritual promise, will have more children of promise than those who come naturally through Sarah.

Moses said it in Deuteronomy, chapter 5. “God did not make this covenant with our fathers, He has made it with us who are alive here at the mountain today.” The Law governed the relationship between God with the Jews. Now God would always keep his covenant, but the Jews would not. Therefore there arose an indebtedness under the law which, in order to satisfy that indebtedness, the Jews had to be converted from human beings to property to satisfy this. And they changed their status from being free people to the status of being slaves.

“One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar.”

You must understand what an insult this would have been to the Jews and what an insult it would be to Jews today and to those people who are Judaizers among the people of God. It is a popular thing today to be a Judaizer but the danger that it is, is that it turns sons with liberty back to slavery and you lose your rights of sonship once you become a slave. Nevertheless, the natural children of Sarah and Abraham, the Jews, are the actual slaves if they remain under the law.

“Now Hagar stands for Mt. Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem.” At the point at which Paul was saying this, Jerusalem had not fallen so he was saying Mt. Sinai corresponds to Hagar because the children of the law are going to be made into slaves and that ties into the present city of Jerusalem with the Temple and with the worship associated with the Temple. And it says this about all of that: “She is in slavery with her children.”

Now for all of those who would go under the law, especially if you are a believer, never under the law, if you would go under the law this is what you have done. You have traded your liberty in Christ for the status of a slave. You have gone from a relationship of grace, the grace of sonship, to the restrictions of the law, which you can never keep. And because you cannot keep the law you have traded your place in the house of God for that of a slave—that’s what you have done because the law is only capable of making you into a slave. Now that’s what Paul is saying here when it says, “But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.”

Now here it gets to be amazingly plain. Galatian 3:15, this lays out everything that I’ve been saying. It lays out the fact that God began creation with a promise of sonship, a covenant that He swore to Himself. That covenant pre-existed the Law and is known as a covenant. God attaches this covenant to Abraham and promises his descendents that they would be his heirs. At Mount Sinai, He offers this covenant to the Jews, promising to make them a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. They elected not to, because that would have required them to go up into the presence of God, which, when they refused to, then God gave them the law. The law was between them and God because they couldn’t keep the law; the law made them a slave. God kept the law; they refused to keep it; they were made into slaves. But here the Scriptures line all of this out for us.

This is not a mystery. I would challenge anyone to read the following verses and say that believers are still to follow the law.

Galatians, chapter 3 beginning at verse 15,

“Brothers, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say ‘and to seeds,’ meaning many people, but ‘and to your seed,’ meaning one person, who is Christ. What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later…” Later than than this promise to Abraham. The law..., “…does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on a promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise. What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator” (the mediator was Moses.)

“A mediator, however, does not represent just one party; but God is one. Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not!

For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe. Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.”

What are we then?

"You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.” And then he says, “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

So first God promised the Jews sonship. They would have been refined in the presence of God on Sinai. But they refused sonship; they were put under the law, but, because they couldn’t keep the law, they became slaves. The law on Mount Sinai arrived 430 years after the original covenant was made. God first made a covenant with himself and then ratified that covenant with Abraham. That was the existing covenant.

That’s why God would have brought them up to Mount Sinai to have entered that covenant. When they rejected that covenant, then God gave them the law, which made them into slaves. He could hold them under the restrictions of the law until the Seed should come but once the Seed came He fulfilled the law. Once the Law was fulfilled there is no benefit of the Law for those in Christ. Sons are now led by the Spirit of God. He is our Father. If you say that the “do and don’ts” of the Law (which include the 10 Commandments) are your direction for life then you have agreed to a slave’s wage; you are not thinking as a son. Furthermore, no one who thinks this way (a transactional relationship in the Law vs one of love and sameness in the Spirit) can please God.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

People say we're not under the LAW, but we are under the Commandments. which covers the LAW.

40 New Testament Scriptures alone says the LAW still exists, we should LOVE the LAW, the LAW makes us appreciative of the Sacrifice of Christ.

You see, we have ACTIONS!
those ACTIONS fall into 2 Categories.
SIN, non SIN
when we SIN, the LAW acts like a MIRROR, used by the Holy Spirit, to show we have SINNED
we then Repent

We are not under Condemnation, but we are AWARE we do SIN, because the LAW and COMMANDMENTS will remain to remind us of our SINS.

We are SAVED by GRACE, but ignoring the LAW is ignoring whenever WE SIN.
So, GRACE, is not a condition related to SIN, it's the ACTION of what God did on the CROSS.
WHEN we SIN, GRACE [[DOES NOT]] protect us from this SIN. That SIN must be put under the BLOOD of JESUS.

Jesus said, in the Prayer He taught to the Disciples:
UNLESS you FORGIVE OTHERS, the FATHER ain't FORGIVING YOU!
So Grace, is what God did, not a Condition we live in.

Ever see the true GRACE DOCTRINE PEOPLE?
the most unholy example and shysters twisting the Word of God.
People won't even put these DEMONS on television any more.

A SIN, is a SIN, until it is Repented of.
And that WON't happen until YOU first forgive Others for their SINS against YOU!
^
That is what JESUS said, not a DEMON preaching Grace!

 

[Nehemiah6]

In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”

Thayer's Greek Lexicon is helpful in understanding what was being said:
STRONGS NT 4137: πληρόω (pleroo)
1. to make full, to fill, to fill up:
2. to render full, i. e. to complete;
a. properly, to fill up to the top:
b. to perfect, consummate;
c. to carry into effect, bring to realization, realize; α. of matters of duty, to perform, execute:

As we can see, the meaning is a little more complex than we realize, and there are several aspects to Christ's fulfilling of the Law.
1. Christ gave a fuller meaning to many aspects of the Law as in the Sermon on the Mount
2. He Himself completed all the sacrifices of the Law in Himself when He hung on the cross
3. He filled to the top the meaning of the Law which is essentially the Law of Love
4. He perfected or consummated the Law in fulfilling many prophecies about Himself
5. He executed the Law perfectly as we see in His using the Sabbath for healings

But then He also said that He did not come to abolish it. That was true for the duration of His life on earth as Jesus of Nazareth, who was "made under the Law". The Jews did not know in detail that the Father and the Son had already planned to replace the Old Covenant with the New Covenant. And He did not need to expound on that while He was on earth. But the day Christ was crucified, the Law came to an end. Thus Paul said that "Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness".

 

[Aaron56]

The Holy Spirit, upon Christ’s ascension, was given to convict us of sin:

Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment

And a bit later…

However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.

So we are assured, by having the same Spirit in us that is in the Father, that is in the Son, and who will only speak what He hears from the Son, that we may always walk in the Spirit.

This is a way that is much more restrained when compared to the Law of Sinai. As a son of God, we are led by the Spirit. Under the law that makes slaves, for example, there is no rule for removing a rock from a river bed. Yet, as a son, if the Spirit directs us to remove the rock we are obligated to move it. To do otherwise is sin. This sin is not found in the Law that was made with the Jews. This sin is only known because it is known by the Spirit and in our spirits. For one who is led by the Spirit, which is the basest standard of life in Christ as sons of God, the Law is of no benefit.

Let me be very plain: to say we need the Law to walk as true believers is to promote a slave contract with God. Only a slave, who have no way to inherit the Kingdom of God would promote such an exchange. Ultimately, such a contract is demonic because the demons are under such a contract: they are perpetual servants and can never inherit the Father’s kingdom. That is why Judaizers and those who say we still need the Law should be ignored outright with never another thought paid to their doctrine.

 

[Nehemiah6]

People say we're not under the LAW, but we are under the Commandments. which covers the LAW.

You will need to explain exactly what you mean by this.

 

[seekingthemindofChrist]

As for GAl 5:14, It is a teaching of Jesus that the law comes from first, the love of GOD our Father in heaven ( the first 4 commandments) then to again LOVE one another ( the last 6 commandments ) it is close to what jesus was teaching but not quite the same, Paul omitting ( surely not intentionally ) the love for GOD above all else. This is why we must compare to Jesus's teaching and place Jesus teachings first in case of a difference. Again on Rom 13:8-10, no mention to love God First from the first 4 commandments, another unintentional omission?

I hear what you are saying here, but I honestly do not believe that there is any discrepancy or omission here whatsoever. How can I say that? Simply because of context.

Galatians 5:13-15

"For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another."

If we look at Galatians 5:14 in context, then it is rather obvious that Paul is describing the proper type of relationship between a man and his neighbor or what we might call a horizontal relationship. With this in mind, it makes perfect sense that he would only quote the second part of the two commandments which Jesus said all of the law and the prophets hang on because that is the commandment that pertains to our dealings with our neighbors.

The same principle applies to the quote from Romans.

Romans 13:8-9

"Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."

Once more, Paul was dealing with horizontal relationships or our interactions with our fellow man, so it makes perfect sense that he would only quote the second of the two commandments on which all of the law and the prophets hang because that is the one that pertains to our relationship with our fellow man.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

You will need to explain exactly what you mean by this.

Jesus gave us 2 Commandments, that covers the basis of the LAW.
1. Love God with all of your being and might
2. Love your neighbor as yourself.

if you do that, you are actually fulfilling the intention of the LAW, even though, the LAW, just shows us our SIN, it's not a way for Salvation.

 

[ThyKingdomComeSoon]

Thayer's Greek Lexicon is helpful in understanding what was being said:
STRONGS NT 4137: πληρόω (pleroo)
1. to make full, to fill, to fill up:
2. to render full, i. e. to complete;
a. properly, to fill up to the top:
b. to perfect, consummate;
c. to carry into effect, bring to realization, realize; α. of matters of duty, to perform, execute:

As we can see, the meaning is a little more complex than we realize, and there are several aspects to Christ's fulfilling of the Law.
1. Christ gave a fuller meaning to many aspects of the Law as in the Sermon on the Mount
2. He Himself completed all the sacrifices of the Law in Himself when He hung on the cross
3. He filled to the top the meaning of the Law which is essentially the Law of Love
4. He perfected or consummated the Law in fulfilling many prophecies about Himself
5. He executed the Law perfectly as we see in His using the Sabbath for healings

But then He also said that He did not come to abolish it. That was true for the duration of His life on earth as Jesus of Nazareth, who was "made under the Law". The Jews did not know in detail that the Father and the Son had already planned to replace the Old Covenant with the New Covenant. And He did not need to expound on that while He was on earth. But the day Christ was crucified, the Law came to an end. Thus Paul said that "Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness".

Dear brother Nehemiah, I checked all of this before posting, I was expecting the post you just wrote, You keep me on my toes! ( which is good!) People always make the mistake of using strong concordance as a dictionary It is not! In the context of the time when the events occurred the meaning is as expressed in the text from Richard Winston in the O.P. is accurate.

Fulfil
(usually מַלֵּא, mille’, πληρόω), to fill up), generally used with reference to the accomplishment of prophecy. It is used in the O.T. with respect to various kinds of prophecies, such as are imminent (e.g. the death of Jeroboam’s child, 1Ki 14:17), or distant (e.g. that referring to the rebuilding of Jericho, 1Ki 16:34); those that are accomplished in a near as well as in a remote event, SEE DOUBLE SENSE, those that relate to some similar typical occurrence class, or character, SEE TYPE, proverbial expressions, SEE PROVERB, and especially predictions relating to the Messiah. Several distinguished scholars consider that some texts in the N.T. containing references to the O.T., and introduced by the formulas, "All this was done that it might befulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet (Mat 1:22; Mat 2:15); "For thus it is written by the prophet" (Mat 2:5); "Then was fulfilled that which was spoken" (Mat 2:17), may be mere allegations, without its being intended to declare that the literal fulfillment took place on the occasion described. Even if those passages could not be applied to certain events, otherwise than by accommodation or illustration, the phrases which introduce them will easily bend to that explanation; for it may be shown, by examples from the Rabbins and from the earliest Syriac writers, that in the East similar modes of speech have always been in use. SEE ACCOMMODATION.
It is to be observed, however, concerning the formulas "that it might befulfilled,” "then was fulfilled," etc., when used with reference to the fulfilnent of prophecy in the New Testament, the events are not to be understood as happening merely for the purpose of making good the predictions, but rather that in or by this event was fulfilled the prophecy. The ambiguity in the understanding of the first of these formulas arises from what are technically called the telic and the ecbaticuses of the Greek particle ἵνα. It is also to be noted that the individuals or nations actually engaged in fulfilling prophecy often had no such intention, or even any knowledge that they were doing so. See Stuart, in Biblical Repos. 1835, page 86; Woods, Lectures on Inspiration, page 26; Pye Smith, Principles of Prophetic Interpretation, page 51, and others. Some, however (e.g. Davidson, Sacred Hermeneutics, page 471 sq.), contend that the phrase ἵνα πληρωθῇ, "that it might be fulfilled," and similar expressions in both the Heb. and Gr. Scriptures, always designate an intentional and definite fulfillment of an express prediction (Meth. Quar. Rev. April 1867, page 194). SEE PROPHECY.

I will discuss with you later I have a trip planned and will be back Monday, a question for you until then is the new covenant in effect or is it on Christ second coming?

BLessings brother.

 

[ThyKingdomComeSoon]

I hear what you are saying here, but I honestly do not believe that there is any discrepancy or omission here whatsoever. How can I say that? Simply because of context.

Galatians 5:13-15

"For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another."

If we look at Galatians 5:14 in context, then it is rather obvious that Paul is describing the proper type of relationship between a man and his neighbor or what we might call a horizontal relationship. With this in mind, it makes perfect sense that he would only quote the second part of the two commandments which Jesus said all of the law and the prophets hang on because that is the commandment that pertains to our dealings with our neighbors.

The same principle applies to the quote from Romans.

Romans 13:8-9

"Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."

Once more, Paul was dealing with horizontal relationships or our interactions with our fellow man, so it makes perfect sense that he would only quote the second of the two commandments on which all of the law and the prophets hang because that is the one that pertains to our relationship with our fellow man.

I have a short tip planned Ill reply on Monday,

Peace be upon you.