You're maligning God's Word to "prove" your cult's false theology again just as you malign my words.
The speaker in Luke 16:17 is Jesus Christ who "is the end of the law, so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes" (Rom 10:4). Jesus maintained that the proper way to keep any commandment was to fulfill the purpose for which it was given. The law for Jesus was the expression of God’s will which is eternal and unchangeable. Jesus did not come to modify the will of God; Jesus fulfilled it.
As Jesus said in Matthew 5:17, ""Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Not one jot or tittle would pass from the law until all was fulfilled. With Jesus’ death and resurrection, his exaltation and the sending of the Holy Spirit upon the church, that time of fulfillment came. That which the law foreshadowed was now fulfilled. The law had come through Moses, grace and truth now came through Jesus Christ.
In the past the marks of membership of the people of God were being born a Jew (or becoming a proselyte), circumcision (if a male) and obedience to the Mosaic law. But now the marks of membership were faith in Jesus Christ and participation in His Holy Spirit.
Circumcision and observance of the Mosaic Law were no longer required. However, the love of God and love of neighbor, which summed up what the law required, were to be produced in those who had been reborn, have God's morality "written on their heart," and walk in the Spirit. The Mosaic law was no longer their law any more than the Mosaic covenant was still their covenant; however, their scripture (including the law) was still useful for ‘teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness’ (2 Tim. 3:16), as long as it was read paradigmatically. The Apostles John and Paul got the message, you obviously never did.
Paul makes it clear that with Christ's death and resurrection sinners are now declared righteous, not on the basis of their merits in keeping the old covenant Mosaic Sabbath law, but rather on the basis of their standing "in Christ": "There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8:1 RSV; cf. Rom 3:21–31; Gal 3:11; Eph 2:8–9). Jesus doesn't then toss them all into hell anyway for failing to adhere to the external observance of the old covenant Mosaic Sabbath law (which the cult of SDA false theology designed by SDA false prophets teach).
Simply, Jesus never doubted the authority of the Mosaic Law for the time preceding the entrance of the kingdom, and his instructions to followers living in that time will naturally include admonitions to obey those Laws. But Jesus clearly reveal that He transcends it and also that a new era of salvation history is indeed breaking in. This is an era in which Jesus’ own teaching will be the central authority for the people of God and that only in Christ can grace now be found with the Mosaic Law no lnoger having the same position and significance that it had before.
Now Paul wrote the Book of Romans and saw Jesus as “abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations” (Eph 2:15). Through him “we have been released from the law” which once “bound us” (Rom 7:6). Serving “in the old way of the written code” (Rom 7:6) and seeking to establish his own righteousness (Rom 10:3) had only brought Paul into opposition to the very purpose of God rather than into peace with God.
In Romans 7 he shows that the law as expression of God’s will remains; that it reveals, as ever, human sin and rebellion against God. But he also shows that the law is powerless to bring about obedience. It is an external norm; it does not provide the power with which to achieve the norm. Therefore the attempt to achieve righteousness based on the law (Rom 10:5) invariably ends in the experience of failure. Paul’s summation of this experience is caught up in the words “What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me?” (Rom 7:24). His answer to that question is “Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 7:25). Why? Because “Christ is the end of the law.” The word “end” (telos) can designate eitherthe “goal,” “outcome,” “purpose” toward which something is directed, or the “end,” “cessation.” Many Biblical interpreters believe that both meanings are caught up in this text. For Paul, the law “was our custodian until Christ came” (Gal 3:24 RSV). Its temporary function has now been accomplished; and Christ is therefore also the terminus, the cessation of the law.
But Paul is saying much more here than simply repeating the conviction of one aspect of his tradition and the witness of the early church that there is a cessation of the law in the messianic period. He qualifies the conviction that the Mosaic law has been completed and abrogated in Christ with the phrase “unto righteousness.” English translations have not served us well here, for they have generally blunted the connection between the statement “Christ is the end of the law” and the qualifying phrase “unto righteousness.”
The preposition unto expresses purpose or goal. Christ is not the end of the law in an absolute sense. He does not abolish the will of God as expressed in the law. Rather his coming signals its end with regard to the attainment of righteousness (that is, right relationship with God). He is the revelation ofGod’s righteousness (Rom 1:17). His life is an incarnation of God’s relation-restoring action, God’s way of setting us right (Rom 10:3). Therefore, the lawas a means of approach to God, as that which determines relationship with God, as that which was perceived in Paul’s Jewish tradition to lead to life on the basis of conformity, has been abolished.
A third phrase in this text adds a further qualifier to the assertion that Christ is the end of the law. Namely, he is the end of the law “for everyone who believes.” For it is only in the response of faith to Christ, in the humble submission to God’s righteousness (Rom 10:3) that the bondage of the law—consisting of its revelation of sin and its inability to help us beyond it—can come to its end.
Paul provides no grounds for imposing the Hebrew sabbath on the Christian. The Christian is free from the burden because the Spirit of Christ enables him to fulfill God's will apart from external observance. The author of Hebrews likewise speaks of the Hebrew sabbath only as a type of "God's rest," which is theinheritance of all the people of God (Heb 4:1-10). He does not tell his readers to keep the sabbath, but rather urges them to "strive to enter that rest" (4:11).
Such a travel motif becomes all the more related to an eschatological mindset when we recall that Jesus is described in Hebrews 12:2 as the “Pioneer and Perfector” of faith, the one who not only begins but brings to completion the journey of faith. It is difficult not to see the future Parousia of Jesus Christ as the time when his role as “Perfector” is played out, a suggestion which also helps to make sense of the curious declaration made in Hebrews 4:9 about Joshua not giving “rest” to the people of God. It seems certain that the author is playing with the name “Joshua” (Iēsous), seeing the OT character as a prefigurement of the Lord Jesus Christ.
And it was all good for centuries until someone made the mistake of asking a certain William Miller to speak in their church in 1831 which resulted in him making a false prophecy and a small group of people in denial who couldn't accept the fact that the false prophecy failed weaving ridiculous heresys together to try and "prove" that it actually had happened. Rachel Oakes Preston's arrival only got them more lost and in bondage and here we are today with SDA "evangelists" maligning God's Word on CC to "save" everyone by pulling them into their gross hermeneutical error.
