To abolish or not to abolish?

[Josh]

Do we have a contradiction between Matthew and Paul here? What do you think?

Matthew 5:17-18

"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. 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."

Ephesians 2:14-15a

"For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations."

Of course, please reference these passages, which I've shamelessly cut and pasted out of their larger context

[michelle]

It appears that when Jesus saws "the Law" He is refering to the OT as a whole. He did not come to wipe out all of the OT, but rather He came to fulfill the prophecies of the OT. When Paul references "the Law" he is speaking specifically of Mosaic law and all of the rules that came with it. While they both use the term "the law" they are talking about different things so there would not be a contradiction.

Here is an interesting link with lists all 613 commandments: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_mitzvot

Can you imagine having to remember ALL of these things?

[yeshuafreak]

michelle, the NT has more mitzvot than the OT. so that is not a very good argument.

excuse me if i appear defensive. i am truly sorry. i really notice i get that waay alot on this subject, becuase the answers come as second nature to me, and others seem to attack,m though i know this is not your intention here, me when i refute their theology.

the fact is that Paul could be reffering to 2 things other than the law itself:

some say the translation is wrong and the verse actually means that the ENMITY itself is abolished, not the cause of the enmity ( for the law can cause death or life, but Yeshua makes us able to choose life (dt; Ro).

another possibillity is like in col and eph where he wipes out the ordinances that were against us- the book of lifes records of our sins. this is suggested by the word "blotting" and the fact that peter uses the same analogy to clearly claim that he is speaking of the sins recorded in one of the heavenly books.

Jesus did not abolish the law. He came to fulfill it. the verse given says that the law- if thats what you think is reffered to there- IS abolished, but he does not say that he fulfilled it. that is a contradtiction. Paul obviously means something else, or is making a mistake.

shalom- john