The names of the "Old Testament", the "New Testament" and "Jesus" can be vague and even contradictory unless more clearly defined.
Peter Rose
Hi Glen, do you mean as in Matthew 5:17, or with another slant ?
Phil Pasley
Excellent point. Christ came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it. Originally our Jewish brothers were us, God chose certain ones to set aside and then gave them the law, a guidebook. At the end of the guide book was/is the ultimate expression of love, the son of man and the son of God giving his blood for our sins and to fullfull that which was written many years prior.
Glen, I am a true neophyte and your work is truly inspiring as you do not take claim for it but all the glory is given to Christ. There is so much to learn, you truly simplify a somewhat difficult task. Thank you and for the work you do.
Hi Peter, yes Matt 5:17 is a good summary of what I mean. I think sometimes we imagine that the OT is fulfilled in a new set of religious patriarchs and precepts (called Apostles and Epistles).
So quite often an OT sermon will finish on some NT verses to show that these things still apply to us. But the way it's done is to imply that the OT is fulfilled by the New rather than by the Person and work of Jesus. Therefore I'm still left with law at the end of the day (it just happens to be a slightly newer law!). It's possible to think of the NT as the point rather than Christ Himself.
Instead we should see that both Old and New are pointing beyond themselves to Jesus
The names of the "Old Testament", the "New Testament" and "Jesus" can be vague and even contradictory unless more clearly defined.
Hi Glen, do you mean as in Matthew 5:17, or with another slant ?
Excellent point. Christ came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it. Originally our Jewish brothers were us, God chose certain ones to set aside and then gave them the law, a guidebook. At the end of the guide book was/is the ultimate expression of love, the son of man and the son of God giving his blood for our sins and to fullfull that which was written many years prior.
Glen, I am a true neophyte and your work is truly inspiring as you do not take claim for it but all the glory is given to Christ. There is so much to learn, you truly simplify a somewhat difficult task. Thank you and for the work you do.
Hi Peter, yes Matt 5:17 is a good summary of what I mean. I think sometimes we imagine that the OT is fulfilled in a new set of religious patriarchs and precepts (called Apostles and Epistles).
So quite often an OT sermon will finish on some NT verses to show that these things still apply to us. But the way it's done is to imply that the OT is fulfilled by the New rather than by the Person and work of Jesus. Therefore I'm still left with law at the end of the day (it just happens to be a slightly newer law!). It's possible to think of the NT as the point rather than Christ Himself.
Instead we should see that both Old and New are pointing beyond themselves to Jesus
Thanks Phil. And, as you say, Glory to Christ! :)
Well put. I will do my best to tuck it away!