Not to abolish, to fulfill...

[one_raven]

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


What do you make of this passage?
I have been trying to determine what he meant by this for a long time.

Taken on the surface, he seems to be saying he is the fulfillment of the prophecies. He says that he is not here to abolish Jewish law.
Right?
He goes on to seemingly make the laws even more strict and redefine sin.

On the other hand, he overturns Mosaic Law laid out in Leviticus time and again.
Like in Matthew 15:10 Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11 What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "

Christians do not follow the Koser food preparations outlined in Leviticus (presumably because of this line).

When the "Rich Young Man" asked Jesus what he must do to obtain eternal life, Jesus told him to obey the commandments:
Matthew 19:18 "Which ones?" the man inquired.

Jesus replied, " 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, 19 honor your father and mother,' and 'love your neighbor as yourself.'"

But Jesus said he did not come to abolish law.

If it weren't for the "I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them" bit, it would seem, by reading the Synoptic Gospels, that Jesus was preaching an entirely different interpretation of the Tanakh and making new rules altogether based on that new interpretation.

I am confused.
Maybe someone an help me out with this.

Did Jesus come to abolish or fulfill the law?

 

[Hapsburg]

he could do neither, as he had no authority to do so, being simply a madman with several psychological problems.

 

[one_raven]

he could do neither, as he had no authority to do so, being simply a madman with several psychological problems.

Thanks.
That clears it all up now.
I appreciate the enlightening discussion, Haps.

 

[Hapsburg]

Assuming you're being sarcastic, he's reasonings why:
Claiming to be chosen one/savior type of figure, obviously a sign of what is called "messiah complex", a psychological disorder shared by notable crazies such as Adolf Hitler and David Koresh, not to mention Charles Manson and Alexander III.
A possible reason for this may have been the mother's mild exposure to radon or a similar radioactive material prior to giving birth. Why the hell else would the child be described as "glowing" were it not for radiation?
In addition, being a mere preacher and not a higher-echelon Jewish holy man, he wouldn't really have much legal authority to change Jewish scripture and law that would allow him to abolish parts of the Torah or finalize them.
Add to this the fact that he was a traitor to the Roman Empire, he was clearly unfit to be taken seriously by any reasonable degree.

 

[one_raven]

Of course I was being sarcastic.
You didn't bother trying to answer my question, you responded, as you usually do, with a sarcastic statement of your own simply expressing your disbelief in Jesus and Christianty rather than actually trying to address what I brought up.
What would you expect?

The question, you see, was not regarding whether he had the authority, capacity, intergirty or any other -ty to change Jewish law.

As a matter of fact, this has nothing to do even with whether or not he existed
(I'm not a Christian, by the way).

This is a question regarding intent.
Think of it as a literary discussion if you can.

What was the character Jesus trying to convey in this scene?

The book was written with the expressed purpose of teaching people.
What was the Jesus character trying to teach with these particular words?

I don't belong to any religion, but I am interested in them all.
You don't have to discuss this at all.
If you want to, please do.
If you want to simply ignore the discussion and rant about how bad/wrong/silly Jesus and Christianty are, there are PLENTY of other threads here for that purpose - I would appreciate it if you used those threads instead.

 

[Hapsburg]

It seems like the characters is very full of himself, but in a selfless and positive way, what with the coming to fufill the prophecies of the ancients and so forth, and trying to reform the Jewish faith to make it more...universal. Rather like Anakin Skywalker mixed with Riddick, except without the whole "badass" thing.