DeistPaladin Wrote:It also insists on adherence to OT laws. Other Gospels speak more to Jesus "fulfilling" OT laws and thereby making them obsolete.
As far as I know only Matthew and Luke (of the gospels) deal with this and both appear to defend the law.
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/otlaw.html
Luke seems to contradict himself(16:16 vs 16:17), but the last word is: "It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail."
More here:
Quote:Luke And The Law - S. G. Wilson, p 30
At this point an influential interpretation of Lk. 16:16-17, which would place it firmly in this category, deserves mention. H. Conzelmann, for whom 16:16 is an essential clue to Lucan theology, not unreasonably interprets the reference to the law in 16:16a in terms of the verse which immediately follows: while it might seem that 'the preaching of the kingdom' has superseded 'the law and the prophets', in view of 16:17 this cannot have been Luke's meaning. 'To the traditional verse Lk. 16:16 there is immediately added the obviously editorial statement of v. 17. Thus even if the original sense of this verse pointed to a break, to the supersession of the old aeon by the new, Luke makes it point at the same time to a continuity: until now there was "only" the law and the prophets, but from now on there is "also" the preaching of the kingdom.'43
[...]
the law, understood in a particular way, continues to be valid in the Christian era; but in addition there is now the message of the kingdom preached by Jesus and his followers. The law is affirmed, but also supplemented.
In my opinion it's hard to say what Jesus said because he may as well have been used as a mouthpiece for the law abiding writers Matthew and Luke. But if we are going to take the gospels' word for it, then he supported the law.
