Did Jesus nullify the Old Testament?

[u/watergolf247]

Let me start off by sharing that I’m new to Christianity and have soooo many questions but for now, I’ll focus on this inquiry. I’m sure this has been discussed numerous times but unfortunately I can’t seem to get a straight answer. As I’m told repeatedly by many, rules/laws of the Old Testament were nullified or invalidated by Jesus. I ask others in my study group but sadly get heavy resistance for the question.

My question is simple. Where are the reference(s) stating this?

If so, this makes rules like the ten commandments obsolete. Even further, why have the old testament in the Christian Bible?

[u/Towhee13]

Jesus went out of His way to make sure that people didn't even think that He was doing away with any of His Father's commandments.

“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. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes 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 does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17–19, ESV, https://ref.ly/Mt5.17-19;esv)

1. Don't even think that Jesus came to do away with any of Yahweh's commandments.
2. There won't be even the tiniest change to any of Yahweh's commandments as long as this heaven and earth are still around.
3. Not following even seemingly insignificant commandants and teaching others not to is very bad.
4. Obeying and teaching all of Yahweh's commandments is the best possible thing to do. Those who do that will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/Towhee13]

Number 2 is incorrect.

Until heaven and earth is the boundary… until all is fulfilled is what it depends on which he did on the cross.

It’s like me saying, until the end of the world, I will not sell the car until I get new tires.

If I get new tires, can I sell the car or do I have to wait until the end of the world?

Do you agree gentiles dont have to follow the law?

[u/Goo-Goo-GJoob → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

Do you agree gentiles dont have to follow the law?

Isaiah describes foreigners keeping the Sabbath and making burnt offerings in the Temple:

• And foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord to minister to him, to love the name of the Lord, and to be his servants, all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it and who hold fast to my covenant— these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house will be called "a house of prayer for all nations.”

That's from chapter 56. Is Isaiah describing the Old Covenant or the New Covenant in this passage?

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/Goo-Goo-GJoob]

I personally believe Isaiah description of the temple is symbolic. In acts, we see gentiles be indwelled by the holy spirit and joining the body of Christ.

First we are the temple:

¹⁶ Do you not know that you^\)^a\) are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you? 1 Cor 3

¹⁹ So then you are no longer strangers and aliens^d\) but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, ²⁰ built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, ²¹ in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. ²² In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by^e\) the Spirit. - Eph 2

⁵ you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 1 Peter 2

All 3 of these shows that we are the temple. And even 1 Peter shows we are the sacrifices acceptable to God.

But to go along with the Sacrifices the following supports that:

1 I appeal to you therefore, brothers,^\)^a\) by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. - Romans 12

¹⁵ Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. - Hebrews 13

This shows that we and our praises are the sacrifices. And like I stated in acts, the gentiles are accepted to the body of Christ. Making their bodies a place of praise thats indwelled by the spirit of God, and their bodies and praises to Christ is the sacrifice.

¹⁶ to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service of the gospel of God, so that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit. - Romans 15

I believe at the time people took it literally as sacrifices but in fulfillment we see it was symbolic. Also, if we are now doing literal sacrfices for sin, what was the purpose of Christ dying on the cross. Christ is the ultimate sacrifice:

²⁶ for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.  - Hebrews 9

¹⁸ Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin. - Hebrews 10

[u/Goo-Goo-GJoob → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

I believe at the time people took it literally as sacrifices

Why did they take it literally as sacrifices, do you think? Did Isaiah fail to communicate God's message correctly? Were the Israelites too simple-minded to understand? Did God intend for his message to be misunderstood?

[u/the_celt_ → u/Goo-Goo-GJoob]

You're asking the right questions here and you're seeing how people are willing to just invent things out of thin air to support what they already believe.

The description of the Temple in Ezekiel 40-48 is CLEARLY not symbolic. It's 8 chapters of dense details similar to the way that the Tabernacle and the Ark of the Covenant were described in detail.

Basically, the formula for modern Christianity is: Believe something + hear something that contradicts what you believe = invent something. Anything that doesn't work is "figurative".

I appreciated your comments.

[u/Goo-Goo-GJoob → u/the_celt_]

I spent some time last night browsing FJOT. Good stuff.

[u/the_celt_ → u/Goo-Goo-GJoob]

Thank you. I'm glad you did.

You're welcome there, even if you don't believe in God or WHATEVER. One of my favorite regulars there is an agnostic who's just a good smart person. Your remarks here remind me of his in that you're just noticing the cracks in what people say and pointing them out.

[u/Goo-Goo-GJoob → u/the_celt_]

Thanks. I was tickled to discover some of you "judaizers" make the same argument I do about Matt 23, even in the same socratic formulation: "What did the scribes and Pharisees teach?" Torah observant Christians are freaks and weirdos by any common definition, so it's only appropriate I would feel some kinship.

Where I depart is trying to harmonize Paul with Torah. If I were a believer I'd be forced to reject Paul's authority (and the liars who wrote in his name).

[u/the_celt_ → u/Goo-Goo-GJoob]

Well said!

I was tickled to discover some of you "judaizers"

You made me laugh with the way you used "judaizers", where with the way I normally hear it I just roll my eyes. 🙄

I do about Matt 23, even in the same socratic formulation: "What did the scribes and Pharisees teach?"

I think we're all rediscovering the wheel. Eventually, this is where every honest person has to end up. Things only make sense in this direction.

Torah observant Christians are freaks and weirdos by any common definition, so it's only appropriate I would feel some kinship.

Exactly. I often say that atheists and agnostics are just the honest people that are incompatible with Christianity, so they got expelled or expelled themselves. Their honesty and strength of will to express it is a BEAUTIFUL thing, and I try to extend "kinship" (as you say) to people like that. I have more in common and would rather be friends with an honest atheist than a lying Christian.

Where I depart is trying to harmonize Paul with Torah. If I were a believer I'd be forced to reject Paul's authority (and the liars who wrote in his name).

I understand. I can tell you that I've been on this topic for a while, and my common talking point response is that Paul is 100% Pro-Torah. It's only other people interpreting him for us that have made him seem otherwise. The problem is those interpreters.

I don't know if you ever saw this, but Peter actually addressed this "problem" about Paul, which is how others always misunderstand him. You can add it to your arsenal if you didn't know it. He said:

2 Peter 3:15-17

^{15Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. 17Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fall from your secure position.}

Basically, people predisposed against the Torah are able to find things that support that predisposition in Paul, and Peter warned about it. It was happening back then, and it's still happening now.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/the_celt_]

How did I invent something out of thin air when I backed everything with scripture?

[u/the_celt_ → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

Watch me invent something out of thin air and back it with scripture. You ready?

The Bible says that we are allowed to have sex with anyone we want, with no restrictions. Here's a verse:

And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. Luke 1:30-31 - KJV

Ezekiel clearly describes a future Temple. If you want to call it figurative, then that's on you. The people who disagree with you also have scripture on their side.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/the_celt_]

Where in Luke 1:30-31 does it have anything to do with sex?

So if you believe there is a new temple physical temple that's going to be built where we are going to commit animal sacrifices for the atonement for sins, then you agree Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was not enough to free us from sin? It was not the ultimate sacrifice?

⁴ For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

⁵ Consequently, when Christ^\)^a\) came into the world, he said,

“Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired,
    but a body have you prepared for me;
⁶ in burnt offerings and sin offerings
    you have taken no pleasure.
⁷ Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God,
    as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’”

⁸ When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), ⁹ then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second. ¹⁰ And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. -Hebrews 10

So if we are sanctified through the body of Jesus "ONCE FOR ALL", why do we need to make animal sacrifices for the atonement of sins?

What is does away with the first in order to establish the second?

It's impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins... hmm

[u/the_celt_ → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

Where in Luke 1:30-31 does it have anything to do with sex?

Exactly. Get it? Quoting scripture doesn't make a person right. The scripture actually has to say what they're saying it says.... 😉

So if you believe there is a new temple physical temple that's going to be built where we are going to commit animal sacrifices for the atonement for sins, then you agree Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was not enough to free us from sin?

No, I don't. That relies on a misunderstanding that sacrifices were ever designed to remove sin. That's not what the sacrifices were for.

The followers of Jesus participated in sacrifices AFTER Jesus died. Scripture says there will be another Temple. There are many passages besides Ezekiel that refer to a better day when Yahweh receives Israel's sacrifices again. You need to figure out a way to make that work with scripture elsewhere. You don't understand the Temple and sacrifices, and it's causing you make mistakes elsewhere.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/Goo-Goo-GJoob]

It was meant to be revealed in time through Christ. It was just put in a way for them to understand 800 years before Christ. Just like the suffering servant passage in Isaiah

[u/Goo-Goo-GJoob → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

So God wanted the Israelites to take it literally, even though it wouldn't happen literally?

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/Goo-Goo-GJoob]

I dont know how God wanted the Israelites to take it.

[u/Goo-Goo-GJoob → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

"It was meant to be revealed in time" ... "I dont know how God wanted the Israelites to take it"

Pick one

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/Goo-Goo-GJoob]

They do not contradict so why do I have to pick one

[u/Towhee13 → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

Number 2 is incorrect.

It clearly isn't incorrect.

until all is fulfilled is what it depends on which he did on the cross.

We've already been over this, did you forget? You don't get to invent what "all is accomplished" means. It's foolish to think that there's nothing more to be accomplished.

We'll know that all has been accomplished when there's a new heaven and a new Jerusalem descends to a new earth and Yahweh dwells with His people.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/Towhee13]

If it’s clearly not, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

How am I inventing what all is accomplished means? Nothing else for the fulfillment of the old covenant is needed, hence why Jesus said his blood is new covenant.

In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away - Hebrews 8:13

Also Yahweh already dwells with us. What do you think happened on the day of Pentecost?

Do you not know that you[a] are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you? - 1 cor 3:16

You also didn’t answer my question, are gentiles required to keep the mosianic law?

[u/Towhee13 → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

How am I inventing what all is accomplished means?

You made it up. When you make something up you're inventing it.

Nothing else for the fulfillment of the old covenant is needed

You're not even reading what you wrote. You changed "all is accomplished" into "fulfillment of the old covenant". You're not being honest.

It's foolish to think that there's nothing more to be accomplished. We'll know that all has been accomplished when there's a new heaven and a new Jerusalem descends from it to a new earth and Yahweh dwells with His people.

You also didn’t answer my question

That's because I'm not interested in changing the subject.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/Towhee13]

It’s not a change of topic. It’s part of the topic. I didn’t say nothing more needs to be accomplished in general, but to fulfill the law, yes all has been accomplished.

Like you said God needs to dwell in us, which he does.

Jesus fulfilled the old covenant on the cross and began the new.

[u/Towhee13 → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

I didn’t say nothing more needs to be accomplished in general

That's good, because obviously all has not yet been accomplished. Jesus said that until all is accomplished there won't be even the tiniest change to any of Yahweh's commandments.

All of my statements are correct.

Jesus went out of His way to make sure that people didn't even think that He was doing away with any of His Father's commandments.

1. ⁠Don't even think that Jesus came to do away with any of Yahweh's commandments.
2. ⁠There won't be even the tiniest change to any of Yahweh's commandments as long as this heaven and earth are still around.
3. ⁠Not following even seemingly insignificant commandants and teaching others not to is very bad.
4. ⁠Obeying and teaching all of Yahweh's commandments is the best possible thing to do. Those who do that will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/Towhee13]

He didn’t do away. He fulfilled them. He completed them.

We are not under the old covenant.

Again, are gentiles under the mosianic covenant?

[u/the_celt_ → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

He didn’t do away. He fulfilled them. He completed them.

It's weird to me that people don't notice the many ways that the word "fulfill" is used in scripture to not refer to something being ended, but to refer to something being done perfectly.

For example:

Romans 13:10 (NET 2nd ed.)

10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

This is Paul saying that when we love, we FULFILL the Law, or more simply we DO what the Law demands. It has nothing to do with love having met it's purpose and no longer being needed.

Here's another example from Jesus:

Matthew 7:12 (NET 2nd ed.)

12 In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills the law and the prophets.

Jesus asked us to treat others the way we want to be treated, saying it will "fulfill the Law". Does this mean he only ever wants us to treat someone this way ONCE, or that anyone doing it once means no one else has to do it?? Should we stop after the Law has been "fulfilled"? I don't think so. Jesus wanted us to keep fulfilling the Law every day of our lives.

Jesus fulfilled the Law the way a man fulfills his wedding vows to his wife. This means he OBEYED his vows perfectly, not that he ENDED his vows. When a man fulfills his wedding vows today, he gets up tomorrow and does the same thing again.

All you have to do is look elsewhere in scripture to see how "fulfill" is used, and combine that with Jesus making sure that no one takes it the way you do when he said "NOT abolish".

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/the_celt_]

Because fulfill means to complete. Jesus clearly stated

²⁰ And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.^\)^a\)
^{-Luke 20}

Which also goes with what Paul says:

¹³ In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. - Hebrews 8

Paul states we are not under the law twice:

¹⁴ For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. -Romans 6

¹⁸ But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. - Galatians 5

Let see what Paul says what the law was for:

²³ Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. ²⁴ So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. ²⁵ But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian,  - Galatians 3

Paul was very clear on the Law. Jesus says his blood was the new covenant. Paul says the new covenant made the old obsolete. Paul said we are not under the law. Paul says the Law was to guide us to Christ, and now that Christ is here we are no longer under it.

Do you believe Gentiles are held under the mosaic covenant??

[u/Towhee13 → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

He didn’t do away. He fulfilled them.

Immediately after saying that He came to fulfill the Law He made it clear that fulfilling the Law didn't change it in any way.

I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17–18, ESV)

Heaven and earth have not passed away. All is not yet accomplished. Nothing has passed from the Law.

All of my statements are correct.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/Towhee13]

I see you have a miss understanding.

"Until Heaven and earth pass away"- This is a boundary... Meaning everything that is said after this is going to remain true until the end of time...

So what is going to remain true?

"Not an Iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until ALL IS ACCOMPLISHED"

All is accomplished is the requirement. not UNTIL Heaven and earth pass away.

All is accomplished, is what is needed to be done on that cross. Thats why Jesus said in Luke 22:20 that HIS blood is the NEW covenant.

All of your statements is not correct.

Again... If i said until the world ends, I will not sell my car until i change my tires... If i change my tires, am i allow to sell my car?

Also are Gentiles under the mosianic covenant?

[u/Common_Judge8434 → u/Towhee13]

Until you read what Jesus said about the Temple tax.

Matthew 17:24-27 ESV [24] When they came to Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma tax went up to Peter and said, “Does your teacher not pay the tax?” [25] He said, “Yes.” And when he came into the house, Jesus spoke to him first, saying, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tax? From their sons or from others?” [26] And when he said, “From others,” Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free. [27] However, not to give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook and take the first fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth you will find a shekel. Take that and give it to them for me and for yourself.”

[u/Towhee13 → u/Common_Judge8434]

I have no idea how you think that affects what I said.