The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Gay Rights (Theologically Speaking)

Theology General Theology
#101

Sorry it’s taken me a while to get back to you.
I respect your approach Kelly. I suppose that I don’t trust myself to be objective when I read scripture. One thing I know for sure is that I interpret it differently to Fred who interprets it differently to Wilma even though we all say we believe it is the Word of God ( at least I used to say that).
I think one important consideration is how different the starting points of our journeys were. You from Paganism, me from Pentecostal fundamentalism. Please don’t get me wrong - I’m not saying that I’m further down the road than you -its more likely that you have learned so much more that I yet need to learn. But I believe that God knows exactly what each of us needs in our journey and takes us down that route.
For each of us, our destination is the fullness of the Spirit of Christ.

God bless you

#102

Scripture is the Word of God, but people’s interpretation of Scripture is based on their cultural and educational understandings and therefore none can ever say that what they believe concerning Scripture is the Truth, even if Scripture itself is true. According to the apostles, the Law contains no truth, the truth came in Jesus Christ.

#103

Hi SotW:

Can you tell me where you get this idea from and how you define ‘Scripture’?

Blessings.

#104

The definition

SCRIPTURE:
Invariably in the New Testament denotes that definite collection of sacred books, regarded as given by inspiration of God

WORD:
a unit of language, consisting of one or more spoken sounds or their written representation, that functions as a principal carrier of meaning.

GOD: The one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.

#105

Well, this really begs the question doesn’t it. I mean, one thing we know for sure is that when Christ quoted scripture He included texts which we do not now possess, texts which are outside of our OT canon.
Perhaps you do not regard the NT as ‘scripture’.
As for where you get the idea that scripture is ‘the Word of God’, you have not even attempted to support that statement but seem to have avoided the issue by, for some strange reason, reciting some simple definitions for ‘Word’ and ‘God’.
No matter.
May God’s richest blessings be upon you.

#106

O.K. Bob, two pages filled with Scripture references isn’t the same as a two page document. It’s like 100 pages in 2! LOL! So, to be fair and take a good look at your paper is taking me a lot longer but, I want to deal with the text honestly and try to think without any presuppositions when I read. Sorry, it is taking me so long.
As I look at this passage in Mark, I am asking myself, what is the accusation the pharisees are bringing against them? The fact that the pharisees found fault with Jesus’ disciples is in vs 2. Also, in vs 2 is the reason why they “found fault”. It was that they ate bread with unwashed hands which they considered the hands to be “defiled”. Verse 3 goes over why the pharasiees “found fault” with the disciples. It was because the disciples "did not wash their hands in a special way which, was holding to the “tradition of the elders”. The “tradition of the elders” are/were “the doctrines and commandments of men” not, the Torah of God. I find the whole issue is the disciples did not “hold to the tradition of the elders”. They did not break a commandment of God in eating with unwashed hands but, they did break the “tradition of the elders”. Jesus said to the pharisees, You are hypocrites just like Isaiah said, you honor Me with your lips but, your heart is far from me. And in vain you worship Me, teaching teachings, the commands of men. “For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men.”. So, Jesus just said, you are not teaching the commandment of God but, your own traditions! This is why I think the pharisees were oppressing with traditions, not God’s law. This is the context and the whole issue in the passage. Jesus is saying your laws mean nothing but, God’s law does and you pharisees don’t keep God’s law! Jesus then judges that when the disciples eat without “walking in the traditions of the elders” by this “special” hand washing, they do not break God’s law therefore, the food they are eating (which would have been “clean” already) is indeed clean. I don’t see Jesus wiping out God’s law in one verse in the middle of this whole issue of the hand washing He is addressing but, just saying it is clean even if My disciples don’t keep your silly traditions.
Concerning Acts, I’m sorry, I’m not sure what chapter and verse you are talking about. I think 15:20? The Council in Jerusalem told them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled and from blood. After that, if anything is “missed” in the Torah, vs 21 goes on to say, “For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city being read in the synagogues every Sabbath.” Which is to say, you can hear what else by going to synagogue on the Sabbath. Romans 14, comes right after 13:8-10 where Paul gives them the commandments of God. In the contextual reading Paul is saying some people eat just veggies (which are “clean”) and some eat meats and whatever else which, within the context seems to be whatever else is “food” or on the list. Much like some people look down on others who are vegan today.

It is actually all customary work. If you are a gardener, gardening may constitute work. If you are a postman, walking may constitute work for you but, not for everyone. God is very free and open in the celebration of Sabbath. You can not do what is customary work for you. “Customary Work” for His disciples would be fishing off of boats and cleaning nets. Even the priest broke the Sabbath and yet were guiltless in the OT. To the legalistic man made traditions of the pharisees what Jesus did was work because they have a lot of extra rules concerning the Sabbath which, is not Torah. Jesus blatantly violated the pharisees man made traditions and poked them in the eye continually BECAUSE they did not keep Torah!

I’ll get back with you on your paper. Have a wonderful day, Bob!

#107

Kelly,

Thanks for your diligence. You’re right :wink: Two pages is misleading! (Tho it adds little to the issues we’re already addressing on the food & Sabbath laws.) Help me with what I’m missing.

#1. You repeat: Mark 7’s context offers a debate on handwashing, declared to be a silly man-made tradition. I TOTALLY agree!!! But, how does that solve vss. 14-23? Jesus clarifies the underlying kingdom principle: what “passes through the stomach” (i.e. no food inside of you, right?) can never defile you. And God’s own interpretation spells out, “every kind of food” is acceptable (7:19). How could a more unmistakeable challenge to Torah’s food restrictions be phrased?

You say, Jesus surely would not “wipe out” the food laws. But if so, why does Acts 15:19-21 say, “Stop troubling the Gentile” believers with all the “laws of Moses,” “except” or “instead” of only the few you quote? Also, why is Peter (10:9-15; 11:5-9) who never “ate anything the law called unclean” shown unclean animals, and repeatedly told, “Eat them”? And why does Paul insist, not veggies vs. meat, but “NO FOOD in itself is wrong to eat” (Rom. 14:14)? If Jesus’ principle, and freedom from Mosaic Law, is consistently upheld, is it those who insist Torah is binding who reject God’s ultimate Word?

#2. You say Moses’ Sabbath prohibited only “customary” work, defined as duties required by one’s employment. This sounds like a ‘man-made’ interpretation. Doesn’t Torah specify, “NO one may do any kind of work,” and apply this universally, e.g. to anyone preparing food, etc., even those for whom this ‘work’ was not their ‘customary’ job? (P.S. Do you think it’s crucial that it remain the “seventh day,” Saturday, that “work” be a capital crime?) As in my paper, I personally sympathize with Jews’ sense that Jesus’ revolutionary interpretation led the church to undermine obedience to their more literal reading of Torah.

Grace be with you,
Bob

#108

Thanks Bob,
I maintain that God did not call say, swine, “food”. So when you say “all food” you think, whatever anyone feels like ingesting. I assume what God calls food in His Word. Jesus even rebukes the pharisees in vs 9, telling them, all to well do you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. And again, in v 13, Jesus rebukes the pharisees saying, you make the word of God of no effect through your tradition. Why would Jesus then turn and play the hypocrite telling others to reject the commandment of God? In vs 14-23 Jesus uses the opportunity to say that it is a man’s heart that makes him defiled, specifically speaking about the pharisees. But, returns to say it is not because you didn’t follow the traditions of the elders in the special washing of hands. All “foods” are clean. This saying you are using to discredit Torah (The God of the universes law, He who knows beginning from end) is interesting. If we apply the “anything” word in v 15, we could say swallowing say, poison kool aid is ok for us, it doesn’t really matter because Jesus said ANYTHING is clean so, let’s throw off the “law” of God and exercise our freedom from the Torah of God and all just drink the kool aid. You see, how what you’re saying doesn’t work if you really do apply it to ANYTHING that goes into a man’s body.

You say you were raised with the Bible. I was not. When I first wanted to know God, I read the Bible. There was A LOT I had never heard before. It took time for me to comprehend what relationship with God meant, to understand what we should both expect out of our relationship. in v 21 the apostles and elders of the way say, let them learn the rest in the synagogues on the Sabbath instead of giving them all the laws now, give them some that are beneficial to them and let them learn as they go so they don’t feel overwhelmed and start struggling “under the law” instead of walking with God in relationship and growing into what is right. I think it’s important to remember this “movement” was mostly Jews realizing their Savior had come. When reaching out to pagans who were in no way familiar with God’s ways it would take time for them begin to walk with this God they did not know (experience speaking on that).

#2 Again on the Sabbath, you define “work” as “doing anything”. You want to portray absolute tyranny in God’s law but, that is not so. For some, it is restful to take a walk. For some it is not. Yes, it is crucial that it remain the 7th day. If you knew more about the sun god worship day (sunday) and if you have seen what I have in paganism, you may understand better. One points to the God that delivered His people from every day slavery and gave them rest, the other points to idols that demand your worship, demand you burn your child to death in the fire, and many other evil things you can be thankful you haven’t had to even think about with your upbringing in the Bible. I’m not sure what you mean by “capital crime” but, you may even live to see the day when all people on earth are forced to bow the knee on Sunday to the sun god or die (sadly, many christians will never realize there is a difference between the sun god and the Son God). Also, two things on the “capital crime” comment; 1.) I don’t know everyone’s understanding but, Israel’s religious and civil laws were the same. God’s laws are still just and the judgments are still just (though we think we are smarter than God in this). There is no reason to have to be judged if, as Paul says, we would judge ourselves rightly. Be that as it may, there is going to be a day of judgment and God has gently put His hand out to us for a relationship with Him now so we can receive His grace. And, 2.) I never used a statement like “capital crime”. I’m not sure why you chose to put those words down as coming from me but, I assure you I am quite capable of getting myself into enough trouble with my honest, and sometimes,“tactless” comments. I don’t need any help.
I am surprised that this whole tolerance of pretty much anything doesn’t extend to someone who is simply and honestly trying to live rightly according to what most would consider a good standard and, more importantly, what God has given us in written language to know His story and His relationship with people. I’m quite taken aback by it. Is there something I am missing about EU? I thought it was this “Bible” that was used to establish this movement. If not, what was?
Much of what I have read on these posts are more closely aligned with Unitarian Universalism instead of UR. God help us if this is where the movement goes.
Righteousness and justice are the foundations of His throne. Mercy and truth go before His Face. Blessed are the people who know the joyful sound! May we all know the joyful sound!
Kelly

#109

Sorry, forgot about your Peter comments, Bob. Blessings!

Peter’s vision of “kill and eat” took place just before the Roman soldiers came to get him and take him to Cornelius’ house (a gentile). Gentile’s were considered “unclean”. God was telling Peter to not call any man unclean whom He has made clean. When Peter got to Cornelius’ he was surprised that the Holy Spirit was doing with the gentiles what he and other Jews had experienced. Remember, it was the Jew’s God and Savior that had come. The fact that God was now working in the gentiles the very same way was surprising to them. I think that is seen in the reading of Peter explaining what had happened with Cornelius’ house to those in Jerusalem. So, the vision was not about food but, God used that to tell Peter that the gentiles were to be made clean as Peter had been.
Also, never do you actually read in the Bible that Peter, or Paul for that matter, eat anything considered “unclean” by the Torah. EVER.
Sometimes dreams and visions are symbolic. They are not always literal.

#110

Hi Kelly,

I admire your faithfulness in explaining and defending the interpretation that you rightly argue is “not always literal!”

(Minor note 1: “Capital crime” was my term, just expressing curiosity about whether you thought the ‘death penalty’ should remain attached to those who observe Resurrection Day, or fail to observe Saturdays. I take it you don’t.)

(Minor note 2: I think arguing that if ‘clean’ included all food such as “poison,” it would have to be o.k. for our health, incorrectly assumes that “defilement” is equated to health. But Paul explains things can be lawful, but not beneficial. E.g. I could see all foods as “clean,” yet avoid chloresterol. I know it is troubling for you, but I honestly perceive that Jesus so offensively went beyond their understandable reading of the text, that it’s not surprising to me that he got killed.)

I MAINLY hear you arguing that we should “assume” that declaring “all” foods are clean means that all clean foods are clean. For you “maintain” that swine can’t be a “food,” since Torah says it is unclean. But isn’t this circular, such that language is then incapable of ever contradicting your view? E.g. if I argue, “every” item in category X is clean (or blue), and you insist that I’m not allowed to include things in category X that you believe are unclean, you remove the linguistics for me to differ with you.

It may be parallel when Paul says that ultimately “every” person will be justified," and traditionists insist that he must mean only that every justified person will be justified, since other passages refer to some people as unjustified. It leaves no way for Paul to assert universalism, or for me to argue that universalism is not unBiblical.

I often have minority views, and I respect your widely held interpretation of the role of Mosaic Law. I was taken a back by your assertion that we who read it differently are “intolerant” of “the Bible,” and “what God has given us in written language.” When did I appeal with you to anything except the Bible’s own text and language? I would prefer to consider our variations as differences in 'interpretation" of Scripture, rather than as about who is intolerant of the Bible.

Wishing you God’s best,

Bob

#111

Bob, I believe Kelly’s point of swine being unclean is that its not actually considered food. It would be like saying that plastic is unclean or clean doesn’t really matter because God doesn’t consider it food. I haven’t really looked at this argument so I’m not affirming or denying just possibly trying to clarify. (at least this is the argument I’ve heard put forth from Hebrew Roots people)

Although I just thought of this. In Genesis 9:3 "Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs.

So at this point I believe God classifies any animal as food, which is then narrowed later by the mosaic law.

Kelly, why should we follow the Mosaic law instead of the Noahide laws for food? Or why not follow the original food law which is only eat vegetation? these are also in God’s written word.

#112

Jesus’ view of the religious leaders

Jesus made it clear that our righteousness must exceed their righteousness. (Matthew 5:20)

In Matthew 15:12-14 Jesus called them “Blind Guides”.

While talking with them he called them a generation of vipers and called them evil (Mat 12:34).

He called them a wicked and adulterous generation in Mat 16:4.

Jesus warned his disciples in Mat 16:6 to “beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees” which the disciples understood meant to beware of their doctrines.

Jesus spoke about the leaders saying “the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth its fruit.” in Mat 21:43.

Jesus perceived their wickedness and called them hypocrites in Mat 22:18

“You do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.” Mat 22:29

The entire chapter of Mat 23 is a rebuke to the scribes and Pharisees. Some highlights are “Woe to you!” “Hypocrites!” “You are like whitewashed tomb…filled with dead mans bones” “You are witnesses against yourselves” “Blind guides”

He tells them their “inward parts are full of ravening and wickedness” in Luk 11:39

“Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.” Luk 12:1

In John 9:41 Jesus said to the Pharisees “If you were blind, you should have no sin: but now you say, We see; therefore your sin remains.”

#113

Jesus upheld the Torah

Mat 5:17-19 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 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. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

Mat 7:12 “Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.”

Mat 8:4 “And Jesus said to him, “see that you tell no one; but go your way, show yourself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, as a testimony to them.”

Mat 19:17-19 “So He said to him, “why do you call me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.” He said to Him, “Which ones?” Jesus said, “you shall not murder,” “you shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not bear false witness,” “Honor your father and your mother,” “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Also, in Mark 10:18,19)

Mat 22:37-40 “Jesus said to him, “you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.” This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” On these two commandments hang all the law and the Prophets.”

(Also in Mark 12:29-31 BUT, there is an interesting extra part: Mark 12:32-34 “So the scribe said to him, “Well said, Teacher. You have spoken the truth, for there is one God, and there is no other but, He. And to love him with all the heart, with all the understanding, with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love one’s neighbor as oneself, is more than all the whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.” Now when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, He said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.”

Luke 5:14 “And He charged him to tell no one, “But go and show yourself the priest, and make an offering for your cleansing, as a testimony to them, just as Moses commanded.”

Luke 10:26-28 “He said to him, “what is written in the law? What is your reading of it?” So he answered and said, “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” And He said to him, “You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.”

Luke 11:28 “But He said, “More than that, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”

Luke 16:17 “And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fail.”

Luke 16:31 “But he said to him, “If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.”

Luke 18:31 “Then He took the twelve aside and said to them, “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of Man will be accomplished.”

Luke 24:44 “Then He said to them, “these are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.”

John 5:45-47  “Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you- Moses, in who you trust.  For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me.  But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”
#114

Thank you RHM. That is what I am saying. That is the plain reading of the text. Would you share where you are hearing this same info? I would like to check out what they are saying. Are they just people that believe the root of what we believe was written for the Hebrews? What makes them right or wrong in your opinion according to the Scriptures?

Why should we not follow the Mosaic law since Jesus is a fulfillment of it? Eating like they did in Genesis is “clean”. What Scripture are you quoting where all animals were made clean for Noah?
Thanks for helping clarify.

#115

One point on the Noahic passage is that the text clarifies he offers up God a sacrifice of clean animals. Magma is referring to

Gen 9: "1 Then God blessed Noah and his sons, saying to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth. 2 The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands. 3 Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything."

Magma, the interesting thing is in Chapter 8 God tells Noah:
"20 Then Noah built an altar to the LORD and, taking some of all the clean animals and clean birds, he sacrificed burnt offerings on it."

Some Messianics might appeal that even prior to Mosaic law, animals were classified as clean and unclean. Though it would be hard to prove on their behalf because the’re argument rests on the Mosiac law.

#116

Kelly,
I see things things the way Bob does. It does not make sense to me that Mark would have in his text that “by saying this Jesus was delcaring all (CLEAN) foods as clean”. If Mark understood it the way you did, I would think he would have said “by saying this Jesus declared that all foods God declared clean are clearn regardless of washing their hands”. But the plain reading of the text - as I see it - is that nothing that goes into your mouth - food or not food - poison or plastic - can defile you and seperate you from God.

The problem I see with the Rabbinic teachers of his time is they believed that “clean” food was actually an outward sign of their love for God, via their obedience. Thus by washing their hands, they not only showed they loved God but loved him much. Jesus obviously attacks their man made traditions by exposing a truth that they themselves derived from a literal interpretation - if Food is clean then eating clean foods with crap on ones hands is unclean. Therefore washing the hands of unclean things is necessary. Is it no wonder the teachers of his time followed such traditions?

But I find the the point that Jesus states nothing that goes into your mouth includes both Clean and Unclean foods as far too persuasive to ignore. How would you prove that nothing excludes unclean foods? Would you say that Jesus used a poor choice of words and really meant “SOMETHINGS” outside the body can defile them? I see the plain reading of Jesus as saying nothing outside the body that goes into it as being very crystal clear - that is NOTHING outside the body can defile you - literally NOTHING.

Vs 17-23 spell it out:
17 When he had left the crowd and entered the house, His disciples questioned Him about the parable. 18 And He said to them, “Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, 19* because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and [g]is eliminated?” (Thus He declared all foods clean.) **20 And He was saying, “That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man. 21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, [h]fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, 22 deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, *envy, slander, [j]pride and foolishness. 23 All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man.”

Obvoisly the disciples had a hard time with his sayings and that is why they too are questioning him. If he didn’t mean what Bob says he means then why are the disciples having difficulty.

Honestly, there’s no need to respond to me. I’m enjoying this discussion and would actually prefer to hear you and Bob inteact. I just want to drop my thoughts and share.

PS - We love having you here. And EU is not unitarian - just know that many on this site are not EU. We allow everyone to join as members.*

#117

All of Genesis IS the Law and written by Moses. Therefore, the Noahic Law is what Moses said it was as written within the Book of the Law, Genesis. This is difficult for many to grasp or comprehend but we cannot separate the Law from what was ‘prior’ to the Law, if we are using the Books of the Law to form our conclusion. It is circular and faulty reasoning. If there was any other evidence other than Moses’s testimony concerning these things, then we can find out truly if there was such thing as ‘clean’ and ‘unclean’ prior to Moses. Moses used the word ‘clean’ when describing Noah, because he is writing a history from the perspective of the Law, instead of the history up to the Law.

#118

I agree with Craig. Everything has been in place from the beginning. It seems evident that the patriarchs knew these “laws of God”. For example Gen 26 below . . .
" . . .and I have multiplied thy seed as stars of the heavens, and I have given to thy seed all these lands; and blessed themselves in thy seed have all nations of the earth; because that Abraham hath hearkened to My voice, and keepeth My charge, My commands, My statutes, and My laws." (Gen 26:4-5)

And . . .
by faith he [Moses]kept the passover, and the sprinkling of the blood, that He who is destroying the first-born might not touch them. (Heb 11:28)

Hebrews makes it apparent that there is a way to keep the Torah by faith. This is where I’m at.

#119

Mat 5:17-19 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 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. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

How do we discern this passage? I look out the window and the earth has not passed away.

#120

Redhotmagma (and Kelly)! Thanks! I fully agreed that Kelly “assumes” that referring universally to “food” can’t be including swine. That’s why I said, “Then, NOTHING said about “food” can ever challenge that interpretation.” But asserting ‘Jesus revealed that only All (clean**!!!**) foods are clean’ seems to make it a meaningless tautology. E.g. revealing that “All (blond!!!) girls are blonds” asserts Nothing. Even Pharisees already believed that the Law’s clean foods were clean. It adds nothing, and makes no sense to be explaining to them that since food only briefly affects the physical “stomach,” it follows that no food can make you unclean, if one still believed ‘unclean’ foods can destroy you. They knew that!

The wider context affecting interpretation of Mark 7:19’s clarification of Jesus’ troubling position on food, is that all New Testament students see the N.T. church’s central controversy was whether Gentiles should be bound by Mosaic Law. And 99+% of scholars see that the N.T. apostles answer is a clear “NO.” (Paul even saw that something in Torah as central as circumcision was disastrous, because following it would imply that we must obey all the rest of the Law.) So, seeing Jesus as the genuis behind *them *, encourages us to see Him (& 7:19) as the author of this faith and freedom, rather than the alternative of seeing His apostles as repudiating His values.

Everyone sees that the text that sounds contrary to the apostles’ practice is Matt. 5:17-20 (Wheaton’s N.T. prof amply discusses it in “Gospel and Law”). But in Scripture, the term “fulfillment” seldom means a literal carrying out of the text fulfilled. It meant that its’ full underlying purpose is brought to completion. I’m convinced that Jesus and His (and the apostles’) interpretation that all of the Law “hangs on” and is “fulfilled” by love does fully fulfill the Law’s ultimate purpose.