I have come not to abolish but to destroy?
I have not come to abolish but to fully preach?
You be the judge
Mat 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.
Mat 5:17 Think3543 not3361 that3754 I am come2064 to destroy2647 the law3551, or2228 the prophets4396: I am2064 0 not3756 come2064 to destroy2647, but235 to fulfil4137.
The Greek word "pleroo" is Strong's #4137, defined as:
4137 pleroo play-ro'-o from 4134; to make replete, i.e. (literally) to cram (a net), level up (a hollow), or (figuratively) to furnish (or imbue, diffuse, influence), satisfy, execute (an office), finish (a period or task), verify (or coincide with a prediction), etc.:--accomplish, X after, (be) complete, end, expire, fill (up), fulfil, (be, make) full (come), fully preach, perfect, supply.
This single Greek word is translated into two entirely different and conflicting English concepts, "fully preach" and "fulfill", which, if we were to assume that "fulfill" means to "satisfy", "finish", "end" or "expire" the law, would cause it to be in conflict with itself, as well as with the following Scripture:
It's impossible to both uphold or establish God's Law, and "satisfy" it. It's impossible to prevent one tittle of the law to fail if you've claimed that it's satisfied, finished, ended, expired, completed, destroyed, or abolished. In order to avoid a fatal conflict in Scripture, "fulfill" in this context can only mean to "fully preach" or "perfect". Furthermore, the KJV translators themselves, and most other translators since that time, did translate "pleroo" as "fully preached" in the following Scripture, proof positive that pleroo does mean fully preach at least once:
Rom 15:19Through1722 mighty1411 signs4592 and2532 wonders,5059 by1722 the power1411 of the Spirit4151 of God;2316 so that5620 from575 Jerusalem,2419 and2532 round about2945 unto3360 Illyricum,2437 I3165 have fully preached4137 the3588 gospel2098 of Christ.5547
How ludicrous it would be to claim that Paul "fulfilled" rather than "fully preached" the gospel of Christ:
Jesus Christ came to uphold God's law, not to end it. But the important distinction He made between God's Law and man's law is His criticism of the Pharisees for imposing their own "traditions if the elders" rather than upholding God's Law, as known from the Torah which had been very clearly defined for tens of centuries before His birth:
Those who follow the Talmud (which was derived from these traditions of the elders) have done exactly the same thing to our law now that they did to Israelite law then.
But it's not all the Talmudists' fault, because judeochristian preachers and judeochristians themselves have used the word "fulfill" to select which of God's Laws they don't like, discard it, blame the abolition of God's Law on Jesus Christ Himself, and then proclaim that it's not they who abolished the law but that Jesus Christ "fulfilled" it.
It's a slick and disingenuous semantics trick which enables judeochristians to pick and choose which of God's Laws they "feel" is good and correct, and which they themselves, with no concern whatsoever for Israelites, the Holy Bible, or our cultural fabric, deem to be obsolete, outmoded, unfair, harsh, sexist, racist, or any other novel word they come up with to justify the destruction of the clear instructions from God's Torah.
Where do judeochristians get the authority, wisdom, knowledge,or even ability to act as God and determine for God's People which of God's Laws we should follow, and which we should be denied the benefit of? If my God told Moses to tell His People the Israelites that we should stand with one foot on a volleyball in the middle of the ocean and rub our heads and pat our stomachs until He returns, I want to know about it, and I don't want a "fellow" Israelite, or a jew, or a judeochristian, or anybody else, to tell me that I'm prohibited from doing so because they presumed for me that Christ "fulfilled" that law.
These traditions were developed for the express purpose of preventing the House of Israel from falling into precisely the sad moral state we're now in. With no doubt whatsoever, had we upheld the simple but exacting Torah, word for word, rather than allowing these presumed judeochristian experts to parse it out for us and arbitrarily determine where God made a mistake and where He was correct, it would have been impossible for it ever to have happened.
The following comparison of the words "fulfill" and "fully preach", the willingness of so many judeochristians to invalidate God's Law [read: The Torah] based on the notion that Christ "fulfilled" it, and our refusal to understand the magnificent significance of The Torah by themselves would completely explain the moral abyss we have fallen into.
Furthermore, had the purpose of Matthew 5:17 been to proclaim that Christ came to "fulfill The Torah", then the Greek word "teleo" [Strong's #5055] must have been used, because only then would it be unequivocal that it means to "accomplish", "finish", "fulfill", "make", "end", or "expire".
Because this word is "pleroo", and because the following 12 translators do agree that the word "pleroo" in Romans 15:19 does mean to "fully preach", "given all the good news"', or "preached the good news", then we simply cannot just presume that Paul intended to even imply that Christ came to abolish [read: fulfill] God's Laws as written above. Such a presumption turns the rest of the Scripture 180 degrees on its head and makes a LIAR of Christ and God.