Fox News Viewers Threaten American Atheists

[Davy]

wtf does fox have to do with this? someone answer me

It was on the fox news facebook page i believe

[Ad Bot]

[zeros_bro]

nvm

[Wizzeh]

Yes, as soon as he filled those promises, the law could pass

His mission was to fufill the law. As soon as he spoke the words in John 19:10, the law had been fufilled and could pass.

It's a big stretch from "it is finished" to "all the laws are now void". It's vastly more likely he was referring to his life.

"With this in mind, let’s look at Matthew 5:17, along with verse 18: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

This clearly means that the law is valid until the world ends. Since jesus probably knew that heaven and earth wouldn't pass until long past he was dead, that inclusion doesn't make sense unless he means "all is finished" to mean "god's plan is fulfilled and the world ends"

[Dodger]

It's a big stretch from "it is finished" to "all the laws are now void". It's vastly more likely he was referring to his life.

"With this in mind, let’s look at Matthew 5:17, along with verse 18: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

This clearly means that the law is valid until the world ends. Since jesus probably knew that heaven and earth wouldn't pass until long past he was dead, that inclusion doesn't make sense unless he means "all is finished" to mean "god's plan is fulfilled and the world ends"

Jesus is giving us two either/or conditions. The law cannot pass until heaven and earth pass or the law cannot pass until all is accomplished. One or the other can do it. Heaven and earth have not yet passed, so we will leave that aside. But what did Jesus mean by all being accomplished? The natural meaning of the language is that He was referring to what He had just said in the previous sentence: the fulfilling or completing of the law and the prophets. Once He had completed the law and the prophets, the law could pass.

[Wizzeh]

"Jesus is giving us two either/or conditions."

He never says or. It thus clearly means that one occurring means the other has occurred. He's elaborating.

"The law cannot pass until heaven and earth pass or the law cannot pass until all is accomplished."

All will be accomplished when heaven and earth pass. That's the clear meaning.

"One or the other can do it."

He never says or.

"Heaven and earth have not yet passed, so we will leave that aside. But what did Jesus mean by all being accomplished? The natural meaning of the language is that He was referring to what He had just said in the previous sentence: the fulfilling or completing of the law and the prophets. Once He had completed the law and the prophets, the law could pass."

You're right, he's elaborating. The law won't be destroyed. He's only come to fulfil prophecies. The law won't be destroyed until all is finished.

[TeslaCoil]

WHAEEERRR RAAEEEE RRAAARRRRRRRRRR GROARRRRRRRRRR

GRRRR AAAAFFFFHHHJ EOOOOEEEERRRRRR RROOOAAWWWRRRRRR

GRAHHHHH RAWRRRRRRRRRRR

[Davy]

GRAHHHHH RAWRRRRRRRRRRR

summed up the last 7 pages accurately

[Dodger]

"Jesus is giving us two either/or conditions."

He never says or. It thus clearly means that one occurring means the other has occurred. He's elaborating.

"The law cannot pass until heaven and earth pass or the law cannot pass until all is accomplished."

All will be accomplished when heaven and earth pass. That's the clear meaning.

"One or the other can do it."

He never says or.

"Heaven and earth have not yet passed, so we will leave that aside. But what did Jesus mean by all being accomplished? The natural meaning of the language is that He was referring to what He had just said in the previous sentence: the fulfilling or completing of the law and the prophets. Once He had completed the law and the prophets, the law could pass."

You're right, he's elaborating. The law won't be destroyed. He's only come to fulfil prophecies. The law won't be destroyed until all is finished.

What proof do you have that he says and if not or? He obviously came to fufill in terms of

”at the end of verse 18 is not translated from plēroō. It is, instead, translated from genētai, which is a form of ginomai. There can be no controversy about the meaning of this word. It means “accomplished” or “comes to pass.”

His obvious mission was to fufill the law and let it come to pass as according to ginomai, and when he said "It is finished on the cross", he completed the fulfillment and allowed the law to pass.

A supporting point that expositors often ignore is the fact that Jesus applied plēroō to not just the law but also the prophets. Why is it that so many people who accept that Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies have a hard time understanding that, in the same way, He fulfilled the Old Testament laws—all of them? In fact, the two together—the law and the prophets—stand for the entire Old Testament. Matthew 22:40 tells us, for example, that upon the two great laws hang “all the law and the prophets.” Luke 16:16 says, “The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.” John the Baptist was the last of the Old Testament prophets. He forms the boundary between the Old and New Testaments, with their respective covenants. Acts 13:15 explains that “the law and the prophets,” obviously meaning the Old Testament, is read in the synagogue.
So, Jesus fulfilled, or brought to completion, the entire Old Testament. This is supported by many other Scriptures that I have often referenced in other articles on this website. As one example, read Romans 10:4: “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.” The word “end” here is telos. This word means the aim (see Galatians 3:24); the termination, the limit at which something ceases to be (read Romans 6:14; 2 Corinthians 3:11-13; Ephesians 2:15; and Colossians 2:14).

As a side note:

And what commandments did Jesus mean when He said, “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven”? (Matthew 5:19). Most assume that he meant the Ten Commandments. But He never says this. To properly understand, we must look to the context. And the context shows us that Jesus must be referring to the commandments He is about to give, the commandments of the New Covenant—commandments that, by the way, are continued through the rest of the New Covenant and are summed in one word, love. And love is something that only God works in us.

[Stocking]

All these people quoting the NIV are disgusting and should be burned with all the other NIVs.

[Wizzeh]

What proof do you have that he says and if not or? He obviously came to fufill in terms of
His obvious mission was to fufill the law and let it come to pass as according to ginomai, and when he said "It is finished on the cross", he completed the fulfillment and allowed the law to pass.
 

As a side note:

"What proof do you have that he says and if not or? He obviously came to fufill in terms of"

There's no "or" anywhere in that sentence.

"His obvious mission was to fufill the law and let it come to pass as according to ginomai, and when he said "It is finished on the cross", he completed the fulfillment and allowed the law to pass."

When something "comes to pass" it happens, that phrase doesn't mean "end".

"A supporting point that expositors often ignore is the fact that Jesus applied plēroō to not just the law but also the prophets. Why is it that so many people who accept that Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies have a hard time understanding that, in the same way, He fulfilled the Old Testament laws—all of them? In fact, the two together—the law and the prophets—stand for the entire Old Testament. Matthew 22:40 tells us, for example, that upon the two great laws hang “all the law and the prophets.” Luke 16:16 says, “The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.” John the Baptist was the last of the Old Testament prophets. He forms the boundary between the Old and New Testaments, with their respective covenants. Acts 13:15 explains that “the law and the prophets,” obviously meaning the Old Testament, is read in the synagogue.
So, Jesus fulfilled, or brought to completion, the entire Old Testament. This is supported by many other Scriptures that I have often referenced in other articles on this website. As one example, read Romans 10:4: “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.” The word “end” here is telos. This word means the aim (see Galatians 3:24); the termination, the limit at which something ceases to be (read Romans 6:14; 2 Corinthians 3:11-13; Ephesians 2:15; and Colossians 2:14)."

How many times do I have to tell you that FULFILLING A LAW DOESN'T VOID IT.

"And what commandments did Jesus mean when He said, “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven”? (Matthew 5:19). Most assume that he meant the Ten Commandments. But He never says this. To properly understand, we must look to the context. And the context shows us that Jesus must be referring to the commandments He is about to give, the commandments of the New Covenant—commandments that, by the way, are continued through the rest of the New Covenant and are summed in one word, love. And love is something that only God works in us."

I'll accept this explanation.


EDIT: Read this too

2:30 PM - Wizzeh: what does everyone here think happens when a law is "fulfilled"
2:30 PM - Wizzeh: what does fulfilling a law mean
2:31 PM - Wizzeh: just a quick poll
2:31 PM - Tingalz: when a law is enforced?
2:31 PM - Bushido: ^
2:31 PM - Bushido: when someone breaks it
2:31 PM - Bushido: it gets to fufill itself?
2:31 PM - Tingalz: justice gets served and the criminal is punished

[Dodger]

"What proof do you have that he says and if not or? He obviously came to fufill in terms of"

There's no "or" anywhere in that sentence.

And there is no "and" or conjunction stating it has to require both conditions

"His obvious mission was to fufill the law and let it come to pass as according to ginomai, and when he said "It is finished on the cross", he completed the fulfillment and allowed the law to pass."

When something "comes to pass" it happens, that phrase doesn't mean "end".

"With this in mind, let’s look at Matthew 5:17, along with verse 18: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

So by that logic the world doesn't have to end either?

How many times do I have to tell you that FULFILLING A LAW DOESN'T VOID IT.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fulfill

Nearly all of those definitions point to reshaping or ending something

[Wizzeh]

"And there is no "and" or conjunction stating it has to require both conditions"

That's not what I'm saying. Since there's no conjunction it means that both events are related to one another. The two will always happen together, so "and" would be redundant.

"So by that logic the world doesn't have to end either?"

No, because "pass" doesn't mean the same thing as "come to pass"

"Nearly all of those definitions point to reshaping or ending something."

Because "fulfil" is usually used in the context of a prediction. If you fulfil a law, the law "acts".

[Sullivan]

Fox News is just a big old lump of idoits that don't know stuff. They only start stuff to get attention.

[Dodger]

That's not what I'm saying. Since there's no conjunction it means that both events are related to one another. The two will always happen together, so "and" would be redundant.

Actually, it's figurative.
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/heavenandearth.htm

"No, because "pass" doesn't mean the same thing as "come to pass""

The other meaning is also "accomplished". http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accomplished?show=1&t=1313013270 Notice how the 2nd definition corresponds to fulfilled.

Because "fulfil" is usually used in the context of a prediction. If you fulfil a law, the law "acts".

Jesus was a Jew born under the Old Covenant, under the law. If He was to fulfill the law, He had to keep it perfectly, which He did. But when He died, the law was fulfilled. The Old Covenant and its law then ended. We fulfill a contract by completing what we are obliged to do under the contract. Once we do this, we have fulfilled the contract, and it is ended.

Suppose I am an artist, and I am engaged to paint a mural in the city hall. A contract is drawn up detailing the obligations of all parties involved. Once I have completed the painting and fulfilled my obligations to the city, and they have fulfilled their obligations to me, the contract is fulfilled and ended. It no longer has a legal hold over me or the city. It is fulfilled. But suppose, before I fulfill my obligation in the contract, the state government steps in, reviews the contract, and says there is something about it that is contrary to state law. They then use their authority, or the authority of the court, to end the contract, to declare it void, to abolish or destroy the contract before it is fulfilled.

Jesus was saying in Matthew 5:17-18 that He had not come with the authority of God to destroy the law before it was fulfilled, but that He was going to fulfill the law right down to every jot and tittle. Once He did that, the law would end because all obligations in the contract would have been fulfilled. The law changed when the Old Covenant law was fulfilled by Christ and replaced by New Covenant law, the law of Christ. This is what William Gadsby called, "the gospel of His grace, which is the law from Zion, called the law of faith, the law of liberty, and the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus.

Also remember that in verses 19-20, Jesus states that only until we are more righteous then the Pharisees that we will get into the Kingdom of God. Remember that the Pharisees were forced to keep the old Torah law yet would not be righteous enough to get into heaven. This makes the law unnecessary.

[*Magick* Mage]

In short, Christ completed the Laws and prophecies of the Old Testament. He did not destroy them because they were of His Father's and He still belonged to the Old. But by "fulfilling" them, he acted upon them and abrogated them to the New.

I was reading a site a while back and found a paragraph that may help:

...We can see that Jesus did not come to destroy the law at all. He came to fulfill it and, by so doing, he established the law as being from God (Rom. 3:31). Jesus was to the law what a marriage is to an engagement, a flower is to a bud, and a completed picture is to a silhouette. When an engagement ends in marriage, a bud produces a flower, and a silhouette is finished in a picture, the engagement, bud, and silhouette are not destroyed; they accomplish their intended purpose and are left behind that the completed form might exist. In a similar way, Christ "is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth" (Rom. 10:4).

I hope this helps a bit.