Did Jesus break law?

[Maxell]

What you guys think about these?..

http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/j4j-2000/index.html

Okay, so there were a couple of things. Here is what I picked up from "Matthew" (relating them to the 613):

He suggested to another to ignore the law of burial (8:22)
He ate while ritualistically unclean (15:2)
He ate on a fast day (11:9)
He wronged another by his speech (23:33)
He gave misleading advice: (19:8)
He put one to shame: (26:34)
He claimed he hated another: (23:33)
He bore a grudge (10:33)
His teachings differing from traditional authorities (15:2)
His teachings adding to the written or oral Law (6:9)
His teachings detracting from the written or oral Law (5:34)
He cursed an Israelite (23:33)
He worked on Shabbos (12:1) (Or at least supprted it)
He encouraged others to worship other than the one G-d (14:33)
He did not rebuking a sinner (12:1)
He did not love his neighbor (10:35). At least his neighboring Pharisees!

[Hitch]

Jesus may well have broken the Law in the view of the Pharisees, but never from the intents of the Author.

t.Matt 23:23-25
23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
(KJV)

From our point in history its easy to forget that when Jesus commented on the Law or current events there were always results. Some would become fearful,some clouded with rage and often '.many believed'.Our Lord didnt speak like an emplyee but like the Landowner's Son.

Take care

Hitch

[Gavin]

ah, Jews for Judaism.

Now, where is that thumbs down smiley again?

I am not a big fan of their tactics in undermining Christian evangelism.

[Jaltus]

He suggested to another to ignore the law of burial (8:22)
He ate while ritualistically unclean (15:2)
He ate on a fast day (11:9)
He wronged another by his speech (23:33)
He gave misleading advice: (19:8)
He put one to shame: (26:34)
He claimed he hated another: (23:33)
He bore a grudge (10:33)
His teachings differing from traditional authorities (15:2)
His teachings adding to the written or oral Law (6:9)
His teachings detracting from the written or oral Law (5:34)
He cursed an Israelite (23:33)
He worked on Shabbos (12:1) (Or at least supprted it)
He encouraged others to worship other than the one G-d (14:33)
He did not rebuking a sinner (12:1)
Show me where the OT prohibits what He did. So far, you are dealing with only oral law, none of from the TNK.

As for:He did not love his neighbor (10:35). At least his neighboring Pharisees! Where does it say He did not love them? Good grief, do you know how to read in context or not?

[Hitch]

There just aint a 'loving' way to call someone a son of the devil. just as there is no 'loving; way to speak to them in parables for the purpose of hindering their understanding.

But thats a little off topic.

Hitch

[djconklin]

The Pharisees hindered their own understanding by their unbelief; the disciples understood most of the time.

[ollie]

02-25-2003 @ 01:32 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=24094#post24094)
Maxell:

What you guys think about these?..

http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/j4j-2000/index.html

Okay, so there were a couple of things. Here is what I picked up from "Matthew" (relating them to the 613):

He suggested to another to ignore the law of burial (8:22)
He ate while ritualistically unclean (15:2)
He ate on a fast day (11:9)
He wronged another by his speech (23:33)
He gave misleading advice: (19:8)
He put one to shame: (26:34)
He claimed he hated another: (23:33)
He bore a grudge (10:33)
His teachings differing from traditional authorities (15:2)
His teachings adding to the written or oral Law (6:9)
His teachings detracting from the written or oral Law (5:34)
He cursed an Israelite (23:33)
He worked on Shabbos (12:1) (Or at least supprted it)
He encouraged others to worship other than the one G-d (14:33)
He did not rebuking a sinner (12:1)
He did not love his neighbor (10:35). At least his neighboring Pharisees!

Luke 16:16. The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

[Bib Lit Major]

The 613 mitzvot are, IMO, after Jesus, maxell. Thus, we can't hold him to their standard. Even if they were around when he was alive, we would still have to establish the validity of them as a true rule of life for a Jew. Jesus seems to view the OT as the rule of life, not the 613. Thus, we can't hold him accountable to the 613, anymore than we can hold you accountable for breaking the "don't link to Jews for Judaism" law in your first post if we passed it tomorrow, especially since, if I was the only passer of this law, it would not be the true standard anyways, since I in no way have the authority to pass and execute this law.

[Bib Lit Major]

Wow...I didn't realize how old this post was...

[JardinPrayer]

Jesus, first of all, is God. I, for one, am not questioning His authority or His ways. If we accept that basic premise - or even the premise that He is the Son of God, sent expressly to usher in a new covenant, we should note the following:

One of Jesus' most-stressed points was that the "law" - the basis for conduct for the chosen (Israelites) was finished and that the new convenant (salvation for everyone, Jews and gentiles alike) would replace it. Jesus' law breaking actions were specifically designed to demonstrate this.

He suggested to another to ignore the law of burial (8:22)
He ate while ritualistically unclean (15:2)
He ate on a fast day (11:9)
He wronged another by his speech (23:33)
He gave misleading advice: (19:8)
He put one to shame: (26:34)
He claimed he hated another: (23:33)
He bore a grudge (10:33)
His teachings differing from traditional authorities (15:2)
His teachings adding to the written or oral Law (6:9)
His teachings detracting from the written or oral Law (5:34)
He cursed an Israelite (23:33)
He worked on Shabbos (12:1) (Or at least supprted it)
He encouraged others to worship other than the one G-d (14:33)
He did not rebuking a sinner (12:1)

Most of these are not in direct violation of Mosaic law. Some of them are flat out incorrect (He encouraged others to worship other than the one God). My goodness! Everything Jesus taught had to do with acknowledging the Father and being faithful and obedient to His will. Jesus simply did not draw a distinction between Himself and His Father...saying they dwelled in one another. This is exactly what God wants to do with each of us...exactly what God sent Him to demonstrate. Jesus never asked anyone to worship Him...He simply said we can get to the Father through His teachings and through belief in Him.

Jews for Judaism are, by their very title, apparently intolerant of the notion that Jesus was the prophecied Messiah, that salvation is possible for Jews and gentiles alike, and that the old covenant was replaced by a new one. Okay. That's what makes them Jewish. However, if one calls oneself a Christian, then it is for us to believe in the teachings of God's Christ Jesus and in the infallable wisdom of His every word and deed. Jesus taught...all the time. Jesus lived a sinless life. That means God found favor in everything He did. Indeed, God gave us Jesus as a living, breathing example of exactly what He wants us all to be...a model...a template. You can sit around pointing fingers at the awful things you think He did, or you can realize that the same God that handed down Mosaic law also handed us Jesus. Look higher.

Wrath has always been part of God's makeup. However, we are taught in the New Testament that wrath and judgement are for God, and loving one another is for us. Jesus was representing God in pointing out the things He abhors. Hey, had I been there to witness it for myself, I sure would have said "thank you" for the clear examples. As for parables, they certainly were not meant to confound or hinder understanding. They were meant to identify those who have "ears to hear, and eyes to see," - the new chosen people. Faith comes on hearing...if you can recognize truth and God in the parables, you are a child of God. Besides, I happen to think parables are a particularly effective way to teach. Putting concepts in examples we can all relate to makes even a child more able to grasp them. Again, thank you, Jesus!

Lastly, there was this example of the replacing of old rules with new:

Acts 10:9 The next day, as they went on their journey and drew near the city, Peter went up on the housetop to pray, about the sixth hour.
10 Then he became very hungry and wanted to eat; but while they made ready, he fell into a trance
11 and saw heaven opened and an object like a great sheet bound at the four corners, descending to him and let down to the earth.
12 In it were all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air.
13 And a voice came to him, "Rise, Peter; kill and eat."
14 But Peter said, "Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean."
15 And a voice spoke to him again the second time, "What God has cleansed you must not call common."

Get it? No? Well, perhaps your ears are stopped.

Peace and blessings,
JardinPrayer

[mickiel]

As a matter of fact, any law you choose to list, he broke. He either broke it into, or broke into it. He either complettely destroyed it, or he broke its base mold and extended it. If for any reason he didnot break it, he fullfilled it. Law does not superseed Christ, Jesus superseeds law. It was writtened for him to either break or fulfill.

[JardinPrayer]

Matthew 5:17-20
17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.
18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.
19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
Colossians 1:25-28
25of which I became a minister according to the stewardship from God which was given to me for you, to fulfill the word of God,
26 the mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but now has been revealed to His saints.
27 To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.
28 Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.

That's all the explanation I need. Rather than look for mistakes in Jesus's flesh, we should be looking at God, the Father, the Creator, shining out through His every step...his every word.

Peace,
JardinPrayer

[Dr. Jack Bauer]

Okay, so there were a couple of things. Here is what I picked up from "Matthew" (relating them to the 613):

Whenever a source refers to the law as 613 laws, rest assured that the source is appealing to extra biblical tradition. The fact is, there are not 613 laws. Walter Kaiser points this out:
Prior to [Maimonides’] time, the number was held to be 611 in rabbinical circles, for that number equalled the gematria value (the practice of assigning numerical values to the Hebrew consonants to obtain new meanings for words) of the Hebrew word for “law,” torah (Hebrew tau = 400, waw = 6, resh = 200, heh = 5; 400 + 6 + 200 + 5 = 611 total). Maimonides began with this number of 611 and added to it two more commands: the first staement of the Decalogue in Exodus 20:1 (“I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt”) and the Shema of Deuteronomy 6:4 (“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one”).
Walter Kaiser, The Old Testament Documents: Are they Relevant and Reliable?, 191.

Glenn

[mickiel]

Yesterday @ 11:13 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=124761#post124761)
JardinPrayer:




That's all the explanation I need. Rather than look for mistakes in Jesus's flesh, we should be looking at God, the Father, the Creator, shining out through His every step...his every word.

Peace,
JardinPrayer

Mark 2:21, It is NOT a perfect law, James 1:25. The old law WAS CREATED TO BE BROKEN. Any who view the old covenant law as perfect, do not see Christ in his fullness. Col. 3:11, Christ is ALL IN ALL, he is greater than law. Phil. 3:9, a protection of law is not true righteousness from God, even though God gave law, he gave Christ also, which is greater? Gal. 6:2, the LAW OF CHRIST. Gal. 4:21, Christ was destined to break the law. Gal. 5:1, to SET US FREE. Gal. 3:13, the law IS A CURSE, Jesus BREAKS CURSES, BREAKS LAWS. Why the law then, Gal. 3:19, it was a MEDIATOR until Christ was destined to BECOME the mediator HIMSELF. Jesus BECAME THE CURSE OF THE LAW. Destined to BREAK ALL ITS CURSES, or the impossibility of mankind to live up to it. There is more if you who desire need to understand.

[seer]

He wronged another by his speech (23:33)
He put one to shame: (26:34)
He claimed he hated another: (23:33)

Sheesh, do these Jews know how the OT prophets of God spoke to the sons of Israel? Christ was mild compared to them...

[dizzle]

Today @ 06:24 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=125330#post125330)
seer:

He wronged another by his speech (23:33)
He put one to shame: (26:34)
He claimed he hated another: (23:33)

Sheesh, do these Jews know how the OT prophets of God spoke to the sons of Israel? Christ was mild compared to them...

Seer did you see the featured article this week by Dr. Brown? It really drives home this point you are making.

[Dr. Jack Bauer]

It is NOT a perfect law...

Psalm 19:7

The law of the Lord is perfect,
reviving the soul;
the decrees of the Lord are sure,
making wise the simple;

Hmmmmm, which view should I take?

[JardinPrayer]

Romans 2:12-16
12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;
13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.
14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves,
15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,
16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

Let us remember that God gave us the Law. If it is from God, then it is right and good. Jesus specifically says he came to fulfill the law. We were given grace and mercy because of our inability to fulfill the Law to God's satisfaction. There is where the beauty is...God provided redemption for His favorite creation when we had proved ourselves incapable of redeeming ourselves. He gave grace. With Jesus, He introduced the concept of the "spirit of the law," versus the "letter of the law." I think we would do well in this thread to make the same distinction.

Jesus didn't come to destroy anything. He came to fulfill prophecy and to provide a way for every living man to come to the Father. He came to teach. He came to warn. I find it very distasteful to imagine Jesus as a bull in a china shop when it comes to the Law. He was very specific about which parts of the Law could be relaxed because of the new covenant...a covenant, by the way, that would not have been necessary had we been able to follow God's law to begin with...and which must be upheld without comprimise (uh...the 10 commandments). The books of Acts and Romans are full of references to the importance of keeping the Law.

Jesus said: John 10:25 Jesus answered them, "I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father's name, they bear witness of Me.
26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you.
27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.
28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand.
29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand.
30 I and My Father are one."

When the rules of the game are made so very clear, the prize is gleaming in the sunlight and within our grasp, and the perils of failure so relentless and bleak, I, for one, would prefer to be on the winning team. Baaaaaaaaaaaa.

Peace,
Jardin

[mickiel]

Today @ 11:54 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=125346#post125346)
Theonomy:



Psalm 19:7

The law of the Lord is perfect,
reviving the soul;
the decrees of the Lord are sure,
making wise the simple;

Hmmmmm, which view should I take?

David didnot know Christ was sent to break the law. Christ wouldnot allow the apostles to break what he wouldnot. I can't blame David for this statement, were i in his shoes, i would teach the same. But i am not in his shoes, i am in position to see the whole picture, i see no need to call perfect, what God himself never has. What David or men say, is of no relevence if God has not said it.

[JardinPrayer]

Today @ 02:12 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=125623#post125623)
mickiel:

David didnot know Christ was sent to break the law. Christ wouldnot allow the apostles to break what he wouldnot. I can't blame David for this statement, were i in his shoes, i would teach the same. But i am not in his shoes, i am in position to see the whole picture, i see no need to call perfect, what God himself never has. What David or men say, is of no relevence if God has not said it.

Would you please favor us with the exact scripture that specifically says Jesus came to break the law? Because, I'm working from this scripture: Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill."

God does not make imperfect laws. That's just silly. He gave us His rules, we screwed up and He made a way for us to be redeemed. You've referenced and paraphrased a lot of scripture, but I would appreciate direct quotes if you truly aim to illuminate.

Again, when Jesus did act directly against a particular law (like healing on the Sabbath), he gave a perfectly good reason for it and, as I posted earlier, introduced the concept of the "spirit" of the law versus the "letter" of the law. Why in Heaven's name would God send His Son to mess up what He gave us to begin with? That's a totally different script than the one I'm reading! We're dealing with GOD, here. God.

Peace,
JardinPrayer

[mickiel]

A human cannot be convinced agaINST THEIR WILL. Human will is stronger than Gods word. 2 Corinth. 3:3,. 15, Heb. 7:22, 8:6, These are new covenant verses, old covenant eyes cannot see them. The spitit of fainting covers mans understanding. You seek scriptures to understand and support deception, there is no such thing. The whole letter of Galations explains Christ breaking the law. The whole book is simple, just not to the learned. You ask so that you can ingrain the bible into your own understanding, I am saddened, although i like your website name, i do not like traditional attempts to understand the creator of history.

[JardinPrayer]

Since you point to Galatians, I ask you to consider this portion of the scripture:

Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them."
11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for "the just shall live by faith."
12 Yet the law is not of faith, but "the man who does them shall live by them."
13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree"*),
14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

And this commentary, which puts it much better than I could:

Jamieson, Fausset, Brown Commentary:
... Abrupt exclamation, as he breaks away impatiently from those who would involve us again in the curse of the law, by seeking justification in it, to "Christ," who "has redeemed us from its curse." The "us" refers primarily to the Jews, to whom the law principally appertained, in contrast to "the Gentiles". But it is not restricted solely to the Jews; for these are the representative people of the world at large, and [emphasis added by Jardin]their "law" is the embodiment of what God requires of the whole world. The curse of its non-fulfilment affects the Gentiles through the Jews; for the law represents that righteousness which God requires of all, and which, since the Jews failed to fulfil, the Gentiles are equally unable to fulfil.

"As many as are of the works of the law, are under the curse," refers plainly, not to the Jews only, but to all, even Gentiles (as the Galatians), who seek justification by the law. The Jews' law represents the universal law which condemned the Gentiles, though with less clear consciousness on their part. The revelation of God's "wrath" by the law of conscience, in some degree prepared the Gentiles for appreciating redemption through Christ when revealed. The curse had to be removed from off the heathen, too, as well as the Jews, in order that the blessing, through Abraham, might flow to them. Accordingly, the "we," in "that we might receive the promise of the Spirit," plainly refers to both Jews and Gentiles.

...redeemed us--bought us off from our former bondage (Galatians 4:5), and "from the curse" under which all lie who trust to the law and the works of the law for justification. The Gentile Galatians, by putting themselves under the law, were involving themselves in the curse from which Christ has redeemed the Jews primarily, and through them the Gentiles. The ransom price He paid was His own precious blood.

Nowhere does it say the law is to be disregarded, is imperfect, or was destined to be destroyed. What is being said here is that the law was put into place for the jews to model their behavior on in between the promise to Abraham and it's fulfillment in Jesus Christ. What is being said here is that we are no longer in a position where, unless we are infallibly and constantly in obedience to the law, we are doomed. Now, our righteousness is judged by our faith, not our works. However, just because our immortal souls are not utterly dependent on perfect following of the law, is not to say we should completely disregard it!!!

Galatians talks about being released from the "curse of the law," that being our only way to salvation was to follow it perfectly. A few thousand years of messing this up would certainly make Jews more than ready to accept an "easier" way..."prime" them, so to speak, for the coming of Jesus. One more shining example of God's grace and mercy...He conditioned us for what He had in store.

Still, you cannot simply disregard Jesus' sermon on the mount, where he essentially repeats the 10 commandments and teaches the importance of the keeping of the law. SOME things can be let go due to the terms of the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham and the new covenant that salvation comes by faith and faith comes by hearing - but nothing is destroyed. The word "destroy" is not to be found in the entire epistle of Galatians with regard to the law.

I'm not being resistant to what you're saying because I'm ingrained in a particular doctrine. I'm reading the scripture (which, by the way, I had to go do on my own since you disregarded my direct request to quote scripture in this thread) and I'm reading well-respected commentary. Sorry, but I'm going to have to go with those sources over you...at least until I see something much more compelling than what you have presented so far.

Don't be saddened...I see the glory and grace and mercy of a wonderful God and a beautiful and perfect sacrifice that washes me clean and guarantees me eternal life in Heaven with God. I haven't a thing in the world to be sad about.

Peace,
Jardin

[mickiel]

I hold no intrest in convinceing you of anything, i cannot give knowledge or open eyes. I think law people are the hardess exterior i have encountered, more righteous than any. With this mentality, the law is really greater than Christ. I have seen this spirit before, will again, it cannot be cracked, it is its own god.

[JardinPrayer]

Interesting that you titled your post "I understand," since you really don't seem to. I'm not a "law person," certainly not self-righteous if that's what you mean by "righteous," and I never even suggested that the law is greater than Christ.

If you have no interest in convincing anyone, why would you participate in forums such as this? I would think you're interested in your message being heard. Don't give up, Mickiel...show us! I'm more than willing to entertain the viewpoint of another, but you just haven't made any points that effectively address the direct scriptures or the scholarly commentary I've posted. If you're so sure you're right, help the rest of us poor slobs understand. I'm inviting you, not condemning you.

I don't have a "will" that "cannot be cracked." Indeed, the very thing I love most about T-web is the opportunity to expose myself to the ideas of others and to share mine with them. I'm just asking you to provide a clear, cohesive, scripture-backed explanation of your position. Have you read scholarly articles that support your view, or is it yours alone? Does your church preach this as doctrine? I'm genuinely interested in how you arrived at this belief and how you support it.

Peace,
Jardin

[i Wreck n Sow]

no

[JardinPrayer]

No? Nice first post!

[i Wreck n Sow]

Hi Jardin Prayer
Do ya think i might have been a little long winded with my 1st post? I guess i should have read a few post before answering. The initial question as to whether Jesus broke the law has transformed into are we under the law. To that i say of course.Except the law contained within the ordinances.

[mickiel]

But unerstand, i hold no intrest in teaching anyone here anything, but i will futher eloberate on the point.The reason Jesus came to earth was to break it, subdue it, and save it. Matt. 10:34. God does not take pleasure in the law. Nor did Jesus, in Hebrews 10:5-9, this is made clear. In verse 1 of same chapter, the law was only a shadow of Christ, Jesus broke the veil of this shadow. In Heb. 8:7, it is clear that the first covenant has faults. Jesus was sent to mediate a new covenant, by breaking the old, or eliminating it. Heb 7:18-19, much of these laws were weak and useless. Now in Ephesians 2:14-18, It is made very clear that Jesus BROKE DOWN a wall, a barier, that barrier or wall, is the law. In vs. 15, he by breaking, or eliminating the enimity, which is the law, that law by the way seperated men, but Jesus opened salvation to all of mankind.

We are under the law of Christ, Gal. 6:1. Christ had to destroy the law, law and grace cannot co-exist, Gal. chap. 4, an 5. Now that grace has come, we are no longer under a tutor, Gal. 3:25, we are free. But many christians still want the law, needing it like a crutche. The law is a curse, Christ redeemed us from its curse, by destroying it. Gal. 3:13. He destroyed it by allowing himself to be killed. When i say Jesus broke the law, i mean in the manner in which Moses broke the tablets, but Jesus never taught the law, only as a memorized texual example. Jesus did not break Gods law or mans in his personalized living, which is perhaps what you think i stress. Jesus was destined to break the law, sent to destroy it, and place himself in mens heart, write a totally new law inside of their minds.

What i believe cannot be taught or learned. In John 3:16-17, Jesus is grace upon grace. The law was given through Moses, grace AND TRUTH were realized through Christ BECAUSE it cannot be realized through the law, Jesus had to break this barrier. Jesus healed on the sabbath, a dircet violation in many views, John 7:23, but he did much more. He refused to stone a woman caught in adultry, another direct violation. Jesus broke the law by extending grace as judgement, so even when he did violate it, he was still doing good. When Jesus died, Luke 23:45, the veil of the tmple was torn into. I believe this is highly symbolic of the law being ripped apart. There is more, but i am too long.

[i Wreck n Sow]

I really would like to discuss this as whether Gods people are to keep His law. But this thread is about Jesus keeping the law. So, maybe ill start a new thread.See yas later.

[dizzle]

Wow, what a first post!!! LOL, welcome to TWeb BTW.