Posted by Christian Scholar (18.104.22.168) on April 17, 2004 at 21:14:42:
You know what, I really liked your letters. For some reason, of all the letters you wrote on this issue we have been discussing, you were more clear and concise then ever before. Maybe it’s something in the coffee, but it seemed different.
Well, we have a lot to discuss. And as you did, I will go a little at a time, because I do this on my lunch break, and I don’t have time to hit all the issues. But before I get to it, how is (or, “did”) your class (es) go at the University (College) you taught at? I believe your students got some good info.
You mentioned that Webster’s has different definitions for the word “fulfill,” and gave those differences to me:
“(1) To perform, as a duty or command. (2) To bring into effect or to consummation. (3) To finish; come to the end of. (4) To fill the requirements of; satisfy, as the condition of a contract.”
You then gave an interesting way of looking at the interpretation later in your first response:
“Did Jesus come to obey the Law and bring it into full effect (possible Jewish view of Jesus as a rabbi and Jewish mystic)? Did Jesus come to end the Law (possible Jewish view of Jesus as a blasphemer)? Did Jesus come to end the Law and supplant it with a new Law (possible Catholic view of Jesus as the Christ and head of the Church)? Did Jesus come to satisfy the conditions of the Law thereby liberating man from its precepts (possible Protestant view of Jesus as the Divine Savior)?”
Post a Followup