Christian Discussion Thread V

[Morr]

Christ was the fulfillment of Law. Christ is God's Word made flesh.

I do not believe there was anything the Law that needed fulfilling.

That's nice.

[Menassa]

I do not believe there was anything the Law that needed fulfilling.

That's nice.

Right, so as you, who does believe that the Law needed fulfilling. Can you show me that the Law needed fulfilling? Can you prove the claim from Scripture that "Christ fulfilled the Law?"

[Morr]

That's nice.

Right, so as you, who does believe that the Law needed fulfilling. Can you show me that the Law needed fulfilling? Can you prove the claim from Scripture that "Christ fulfilled the Law?"

Formally? The term "Law" was applied to include more than simply the specific code of conduct, as I'm sure you know, it's a word for the Pentateuch, and was sometimes applied in broader terms to include even all of what you'd call the Tanakh today. So "fulling the law" means fulfilling prophecies in the least of terms. Is the Law, the code of conduct, the same under the post-Messiah Covenant spoken of in Jeremiah 31:33? I don't see why you would believe that, God has made several covenants and they didn't have the same rules.

[Grave_n_idle]

That doesn't seem very logical to say. I mean let's check out psalm 119, the longest chapter in the Bible. The Psalmist doesn't actually mention anything about Salvation through Christ but rather the benefits of the Law.

You can tout your believe that the righteous of the Old Testament had faith in Christ, but there is simply no logical evidence to support that fact.

Christ was the fulfillment of Law. Christ is God's Word made flesh.

And Mohammed updated the Greek scripture, and brought the completion of the Bible.

I mean - surely you believe that, too - that's how this works, right? You just get to come in and claim that you're completing another already-arguably-complete religion?

No?

[Salus Maior]

That's nice.

Right, so as you, who does believe that the Law needed fulfilling. Can you show me that the Law needed fulfilling? Can you prove the claim from Scripture that "Christ fulfilled the Law?"

I don't think there's anything that anyone here can tell that would convince you, but I'll tell you what Christians mean by saying that.

The purpose of the Law as given to Moses was to bring the people closer to God. According to Christianity, Christ fulfilled that purpose by dying on the cross as a sacrifice for humanity's sin, bridging the gap between humanity and God. Hence "fulfilling the Law".

[Menassa]

Right, so as you, who does believe that the Law needed fulfilling. Can you show me that the Law needed fulfilling? Can you prove the claim from Scripture that "Christ fulfilled the Law?"

Formally? The term "Law" was applied to include more than simply the specific code of conduct, as I'm sure you know, it's a word for the Pentateuch, and was sometimes applied in broader terms to include even all of what you'd call the Tanakh today. So "fulling the law" means fulfilling prophecies in the least of terms.

Which prophecies would those be?

Is the Law, the code of conduct, the same under the post-Messiah Covenant spoken of in Jeremiah 31:33?

You see if you look at the whole chapter of Jeremiah and at the Hebrew it is clearly obvious that the 'New Covenant' of Christianity doesn't quite add up. Here's why:
1 The verse talks about the House of Judah and House of Israel. When Jesus roamed the earth, the house of Israel was still lost.
2 The prefix before the phrase "and in that time" implies that the next statement being said is being said about the first phrase.
3 The verse says that "they will all know the lord, from least to greatest" when Jesus roamed the earth there were many who did not know the Lord. Under Christianity, there are many still who do not know the Lord.

I don't see why you would believe that, God has made several covenants and they didn't have the same rules.

I do not understand your question, and youre statement.

[Menassa]

Christ was the fulfillment of Law. Christ is God's Word made flesh.

And Mohammed updated the Greek scripture, and brought the completion of the Bible.

I mean - surely you believe that, too - that's how this works, right? You just get to come in and claim that you're completing another already-arguably-complete religion?

No?

And Baha'u'llah came to complete the Arabic Scripture.

Right, so as you, who does believe that the Law needed fulfilling. Can you show me that the Law needed fulfilling? Can you prove the claim from Scripture that "Christ fulfilled the Law?"

I don't think there's anything that anyone here can tell that would convince you, but I'll tell you what Christians mean by saying that.

The purpose of the Law as given to Moses was to bring the people closer to God. According to Christianity, Christ fulfilled that purpose by dying on the cross as a sacrifice for humanity's sin, bridging the gap between humanity and God. Hence "fulfilling the Law".

Then, according to Christianity, the Law could still be used for that Purpose if all that is needed is to be 'brought closer to God.' The Law hasn't exactly changed since Jesus's death.

[Gim]

Right, so as you, who does believe that the Law needed fulfilling. Can you show me that the Law needed fulfilling? Can you prove the claim from Scripture that "Christ fulfilled the Law?"

I don't think there's anything that anyone here can tell that would convince you, but I'll tell you what Christians mean by saying that.

The purpose of the Law as given to Moses was to bring the people closer to God. According to Christianity, Christ fulfilled that purpose by dying on the cross as a sacrifice for humanity's sin, bridging the gap between humanity and God. Hence "fulfilling the Law".

Hence, Romans 10:4

Christ is the culmination of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

[Menassa]

Right, so as you, who does believe that the Law needed fulfilling. Can you show me that the Law needed fulfilling? Can you prove the claim from Scripture that "Christ fulfilled the Law?"

I don't think there's anything that anyone here can tell that would convince you, [...]

I didn't ask to be told, I asked to be shown.

[Morr]

Which prophecies would those be?

Genesis 18:18, for example.

You see if you look at the whole chapter of Jeremiah and at the Hebrew it is clearly obvious that the 'New Covenant' of Christianity doesn't quite add up. Here's why:
1 The verse talks about the House of Judah and House of Israel. When Jesus roamed the earth, the house of Israel was still lost.
2 The prefix before the phrase "and in that time" implies that the next statement being said is being said about the first phrase.
3 The verse says that "they will all know the lord, from least to greatest" when Jesus roamed the earth there were many who did not know the Lord. Under Christianity, there are many still who do not know the Lord.

Your points are well made.

1. Christ is a restoration of the House of Israel, from a Christian perspective.
2. Yes, it wasn't the time the Prophecy was made, it was something coming.
3. All the people of Israel knew the Lord, and they are logically the "they" referred to in the next verse.

I do not understand your question, and youre statement.

Then it's of no consequence.

[Gim]

I don't think there's anything that anyone here can tell that would convince you, [...]

I didn't ask to be told, I asked to be shown.

Post just previous to yours.

[Grave_n_idle]

1. Christ is a restoration of the House of Israel, from a Christian perspective.
2. Yes, it wasn't the time the Prophecy was made, it was something coming.
3. All the people of Israel knew the Lord, and they are logically the "they" referred to in the next verse.

You don't see a problem with allowing the people claiming to 'fulfil' prophecies to explain what those prophecies must have meant?

[Menassa]

Which prophecies would those be?

Genesis 18:18, for example.

You seem to have smuggled the conclusion into your argument. Where do you see Jesus at all from that verse? Without first believing in Jesus.

Your points are well made.

1. Christ is a restoration of the House of Israel, from a Christian perspective.
2. Yes, it wasn't the time the Prophecy was made, it was something coming.
3. All the people of Israel knew the Lord, and they are logically the "they" referred to in the next verse.

Thank you.

1. You can't simply say 'from a Christian perspective, you have to prove these things. If you want to show my why something is true you have to actually show me.
2 & 3. Jeremiah clearly was not talking about the time of Jesus, first off, not 'all of Israel new the Lord.' There were plenty of pagans among the people of Israel. Secondly, the 'they' is the entire World. Thirdly, now all of Israel does not know the Lord and if you say 'Israel is the Church' that's a self-fulfilling prophecy with no actual basis in Scripture.

Then it's of no consequence.

Not even going to attempt to explain it?

[Menassa]

1. Christ is a restoration of the House of Israel, from a Christian perspective.
2. Yes, it wasn't the time the Prophecy was made, it was something coming.
3. All the people of Israel knew the Lord, and they are logically the "they" referred to in the next verse.

You don't see a problem with allowing the people claiming to 'fulfil' prophecies to explain what those prophecies must have meant?

Indeed, you are calling the prophecy 'fulfilled' from a Christian perspective. But you have not proven that Jeremiah was talking about a Christian perspective. It is all the more likely that Jerimiah was talking from a Jewish perspective for two reasons.

1. It's what the verse says.
2. Jeremiah was a Jew.

[Menassa]

I didn't ask to be told, I asked to be shown.

Post just previous to yours.

Has shown me nothing.

[Gim]

Genesis 18:18, for example.

How is the prophecy on Abraham any relevant to the fulfillment of the Law?

[Efraim-Judah]

That's nice.

Right, so as you, who does believe that the Law needed fulfilling. Can you show me that the Law needed fulfilling? Can you prove the claim from Scripture that "Christ fulfilled the Law?"

Your law needs fufilling, Menassa.

[Menassa]

Right, so as you, who does believe that the Law needed fulfilling. Can you show me that the Law needed fulfilling? Can you prove the claim from Scripture that "Christ fulfilled the Law?"

Your law needs fufilling, Menassa.

:facepalm:

[Gim]

Right, so as you, who does believe that the Law needed fulfilling. Can you show me that the Law needed fulfilling? Can you prove the claim from Scripture that "Christ fulfilled the Law?"

Your law needs fufilling, Menassa.

Matthew 7:1 right there for Menassa.

[Efraim-Judah]

Your law needs fufilling, Menassa.

:facepalm:

Your law is only outward.
Messiah allowed the law to be written on our hearts, the law for US is Inwardly not outwardly.

[Efraim-Judah]

Your law needs fufilling, Menassa.

Matthew 7:1 right there for Menassa.

This talks only about judging people. Menassa has cast no judgement upon you.

[Gim]

:facepalm:

Your law is only outward.
Messiah allowed the law to be written on our hearts, the law for US is Inwardly not outwardly.

Wait. What do you mean by the U.S. law being "inward"?

[Salus Maior]

Your law is only outward.
Messiah allowed the law to be written on our hearts, the law for US is Inwardly not outwardly.

Wait. What do you mean by the U.S. law being "inward"?

....This discussion....

[Menassa]

:facepalm:

Your law is only outward.
Messiah allowed the law to be written on our hearts, the law for US is Inwardly not outwardly.

What does that statment mean "to be written in their hearts"

Jeremiah says it means that EVERYONE will know of God and they will no longer need to teach each other. That's not the world we live in Effy.

[Efraim-Judah]

Your law is only outward.
Messiah allowed the law to be written on our hearts, the law for US is Inwardly not outwardly.

Wait. What do you mean by the U.S. law being "inward"?

U.S. law? No. Mosaic Law.

The law for Messianics is inward. Where the law for a Non-Messianic is only outward.