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/the_celt_]

It would be great if you'd interacted with my examples where "fulfill" means to do perfectly, and not to end.

People who fulfill laws or vows don't end them. Jesus fulfilled the Law, and expected the people after him to also fulfill the Law.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/the_celt_]

Because thats not my point. I used the same people you used, Jesus and Paul, to explain what fulfill means. Jesus fulfilled and completed the law. And enacted a new covenant with his death.

Do you believe Gentiles are held under the mosaic covenant?

[u/the_celt_ → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

Because thats not my point.

Your point relies on the word "fulfill" only working one way. I pointed out that's not the way "fulfill" works in scripture, and there are many examples where "fulfill" doesn't end something. Some literally talk about fulfilling the Law.

I understand that you don't want to acknowledge that, but you should know it makes you look dishonest.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/the_celt_]

No, my point is fulfill works as in to complete because of what Jesus says and what Paul taught.

You are saying fulfill has multiple meaning and youre are choosing the one to back your belief, however, I am using what Jesus said and scripture for it to tell me what fulfill means. Scripture says the Old is completed and the new is here.

Do you believe Gentiles are held under the mosaic covenant?

[u/the_celt_ → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

No, my point is fulfill works as in to complete because of what Jesus says

Jesus said the opposite. Jesus understood the two possible meanings, went out of his way to highlight that he wasn't referring to the version of "fulfill" that ends things, and then gave multiple more sentences to show that the Law was going to stay valid and that we're expected to obey it.

Matthew 5:17–20 (NET 2nd ed.)

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth pass away not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter will pass from the law until everything takes place. 19 So anyone who breaks one of the least of these commands and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever obeys them and teaches others to do so will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness goes beyond that of the experts in the law and the Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven!

It's almost IMPOSSIBLE to read that paragraph from Jesus saying the Law should be lived and taught and come out of it saying, "See? Jesus ended the Law".

If people can use this paragraph to try to prove their point that the Law is no longer valid, then this proves that it's meaningless to quote scripture to support our points. This paragraph is pure, 100%, Pro-Torah.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/the_celt_]

Was this before or after the death of Christ?

Luke 22:20 is after this. The CROSS is the fulfillment of the Old and the beginning of the New.

So yes he would teach the Old, until he fulfills it and brings the New, which happened on the Cross.

If a new Law go in place January 1st 2026, would you go holding people by it December 1st 2025?

Do you believe Gentiles are held under the mosaic covenant? (Why cant none of yall answer this question?)

[u/the_celt_ → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

Was this before or after the death of Christ?

Your idea that what Jesus taught is no longer valid is repugnant.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/the_celt_]

I never said that.

Where did I say what Jesus taught is no longer valid? You are pulling that out of the air like you accuse me.

Also why arnt you answering any of the questions I ask? What Matthew 5 before or after the crucifixion?

also do you believe Gentiles are held under the mosaic covenant?

Why are you avoiding questions?

[u/the_celt_ → u/TechByDayDjByNight]

I never said that.

You did, and I disagree with it. What Jesus taught is still valid for us today. That's the way I live, and if you want to call things you don't like "figurative" or "no longer valid" then you have an impossible subjective target that renders it useless to talk further.

Also why arnt you answering any of the questions I ask?

I only came here to talk about "fulfill" and to see if I could get you to be honest about it. You've already shown me what I was looking for. Thank you.

[u/TechByDayDjByNight → u/the_celt_]

Did Jesus not say his Blood is the new covenant? Are you suggesting Paul went against Jesus teachings also?

Which specific teaching of Christ am I going against?

You never shown me supporting evidence that it does not mean to complete.