Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is the Law abolished or not? | Eph 2:15 | McGracer | 57718 | ||
Dear NASB forum, Jesus said in Matt 5:17: Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. Yet Paul writes in Eph 2:15: by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace. The verse in Matthew says that Christ didn't come to abolish the Law but the verse in Ephesians says that He did abolish the Law. How do we reconcile these two verses? Thanks. McGracer |
||||||
2 | Is the Law abolished or not? | Eph 2:15 | packer | 57724 | ||
Jesus abolished the law by fulfilling it. He came not to abolish it but to fulfill it thereby abolishing it for us | ||||||
3 | Is the Law abolished or not? | Eph 2:15 | kalos | 57729 | ||
Packer: You seem to be saying: Jesus came not to abolish the Law, but to abolish it. To put it another way, you are saying: (1) Jesus abolished the law. (2) He came not to abolish it. So what does this mean? That He accidentally and unintentionally abolished the law? He must have if He did not come to abolish it AND He abolished it. According to this line of reasoning, the second part of Matthew 5:17 should read: "...I did not come to abolish [the law] but to abolish [it]. " What is wrong with this picture? Do you not see a contradiction here? kalos |
||||||