“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law"

Standard

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.
I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.



Here comes the debate over law, and it is a debate that has one side arguing for strict observance of the law and another that advocates for either its disappearance or at least a very liberal interpretation of it. Laws are tricky, and hence the need for lawyers.Who judges who breaks a law, and who judges if a law was fulfilled. Civil law is written in its own language,difficult to understand,convoluted in its wording,written with exceptions, and with loopholes, and objectives. Civil law comes with fine print. Laws are written that dumb people can’t understand them, and so that smart people can get around them. People that write laws,have them written so that someone can determine if they are followed. To break a law can have serious consequences.Such as Civil law is confusing, and specific while still being arbitrary,; so was the laws of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Not easy to follow, and also easy for the right person to get around.Laws can be loved, or hated.

When Jesus came around and challenged those laws, some thought his was leniency and others thought it defiance. Laws are interpreted, though there is always someone to determine if they were interpreted correctly. Perhaps Jesus interpretation made them a little easier for the dummies to follow them, and a little harder for the smarties to get around them. His interpretation also might have deflated the judges by placing the burden on the individual. He did interpret the law though, Just as he said. ““Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.” Did Jesus interpretation make it easier to dance around the law, or did He make them more imperative to fulfill?The diligent student would conclude that he strove for people to find the purpose of the law, that command of the law that leads to Gods commandments, and not the fancy wording of man.One can follow a law to the letter and avoid that laws intent. There is always room for debate,at least among men. Can a Catholic get a divorce in a land where it is legal? Is one legally bound to give alms to the poor? What are the specifics for attending a mass, and what fulfills that obligation? If the religious law is stricter than the civil law, can that religious law be reinterpreted? Can a Catholic eat meat on Friday, or pork, or combine meat and dairy? What does it take to keep the Sabbath holy? Sometimes it is easier today to follow the letter of the law, much easier than following that Spirit.Perhaps the laws that should be followed were neither in Deuteronomy, or Leviticus, or in the Civil courts; but in Genesis. After all Genesis is where the first law was broken, and we have been making and breaking laws ever since.


*the poor writing is intentional



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s