Interesting. Do you have a source for this? I don't find 'abolish' anywhere in the Hebrew canon. The other references in the Christian scriptures include
by abolishing in his flesh the law of commandments and ordinances... (Ephesians 2:15)
Then I said, `Lo, I have come to do thy will, O God,' as it is written of me in the roll of the book." When he said above, "Thou hast neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings" (these are offered according to the law), then he added, "Lo, I have come to do thy will." He abolishes the first in order to establish the second. And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. (Hebrews 10:7-10)
That is, he abolishes the sacrifices offered according to the law in order to do God's will. The passage from Hebrews might make sense with the interpretation you offer, but the one from Ephesians is questionable--"'correctly interpreting' in his flesh the law of commandments and ordinances"?
Now let's look at "fulfil".
So Solomon expelled Abi'athar from being priest to the LORD, thus fulfilling the word of the LORD which he had spoken concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh. (1 Kings 2:27)
Seems to me to be saying that Solomon carried out or accomplished the word of the Lord, not that he correctly interpreted it. Likewise
He took into exile in Babylon those who had escaped from the sword, and they became servants to him and to his sons until the establishment of the kingdom of Persia, to fulfil the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed its sabbaths. (2 Chronicles 36:20-21)
While the words were still in the king's mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, "O King Nebuchadnez'zar, to you it is spoken: The kingdom has departed from you, and you shall be driven from among men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field; and you shall be made to eat grass like an ox; and seven times shall pass over you, until you have learned that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will." Immediately the word was fulfilled upon Nebuchadnez'zar (Daniel 4:31-33)
I don't see any evidence from the Hebrew scriptures of "fulfil" being used in the sense you suggest. Matthew uses it the same way repeatedly, to mean the carrying out or accomplishment of some prophecy, not the correct interpretation thereof.
He reminded the other Pharisees (for the evidence is that Yeshua was a Pharisee) that the relationship of G-d to His people, and His people to Him, is a heart relationship from which behavior flows.
I have no problem with this.
We do not become the holy priesthood by following Torah, but by dedicating ourselves to G-d.
I don't think a Jew can separate the two. You cannot dedicate yourself to God without being obedient to Him. Likewise, you cannot truly be obedient to God without dedicating yourself to Him (remember that loving God with your whole heart, soul and might is itself one of the commandments - Deuteronomy 6:5).
Yeshua's sacrifice was the Reality of which all the sacrifices called for in Torah were but shadow.
And this is where you and I fundamentally cease to agree. Human sacrifice is not an acceptable sacrifice, and no one else can atone for your sins (Ezekiel 18:20).
I will be in meetings most of the day tomorrow, and then I will be observing the Sabbath, so I probably won't be able to reply back to you until sometime on Sunday. Shalom.
My source is Dwight Pryor of the Center for Judaic-Christian Studies. I gave you the URL before, but could do it again. Dwight used many sources, primarily from a school in Jerusalem in which Christians and Jews study first century Judaism. Dr. Flusser, Dr. Young, those two names come to mind as being associated with the school. But I'm sure Dwight can give you a citation.
by abolishing in his flesh the law of commandments and ordinances... (Ephesians 2:15)
Yeshua was speaking in Hebrew (or possibly Aramaic, but Dwight's sources believe He primarily spoke Hebrew) to Jews. Shaul was speaking in Greek to goyim. When we read "law" in the letters of Shaul we need to be careful to be certain whether he is talking about Torah or simply a set of codes and rules. As you pointed out, many of the goyim were used to sacrifices. I don't believe this passage was speaking of Torah - which was not for the goyim anyway - but of the metaphysical reality. Until Yeshua's death you had to sacrifice for sin. Now, Yeshua is that sacrifice.
It might be as if G-d did some act by which He made the law of gravity null and void. Any Torah requirement to put things on the floor would not necessarily be abolished. Does that help or confuse?
Then I said, `Lo, I have come to do thy will, O God,' as it is written of me in the roll of the book." When he said above, "Thou hast neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings" (these are offered according to the law), then he added, "Lo, I have come to do thy will." He abolishes the first in order to establish the second. And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. (Hebrews 10:7-10)
I think you have already agreed with me that this is not a unique Christian understanding. The writer of Hebrews was pointing out that in our personal relationship G-d is interested in the heart issue. Therefore, our willingness to obey (whether carried out well or not) is more important than the rule book. Our willingness to obey didn't overcome the metaphysical principle that a sacrifice had to be made and our flesh had to be circumcised. Yeshua's death overcame that metaphysical principle so that the circumcision of our hearts could be the sole issue between G-d and us.
Now let's look at "fulfil".
I don't see any evidence from the Hebrew scriptures of "fulfil" being used in the sense you suggest. Matthew uses it the same way repeatedly, to mean the carrying out or accomplishment of some prophecy, not the correct interpretation thereof.
According to Dwight, this a uniquely first century construct that was used by the Rabbis when discussing Torah. It is not a generic understanding of the words but a very specific one. I was intending for this reality to be conveyed when comparing Yeshua's and Shaul's words.
I have no problem with this [that our obedience to G-d is a heart matter].
Neither did King David, if I read the Psalms he wrote correctly.
I don't think a Jew can separate the two [being a part of the holy priesthood and being Torah obedient]. You cannot dedicate yourself to God without being obedient to Him. Likewise, you cannot truly be obedient to God without dedicating yourself to Him (remember that loving God with your whole heart, soul and might is itself one of the commandments - Deuteronomy 6:5).
(I hope you knew that by the holy priesthood, I didn't mean the Aaronic Priesthood, but the priesthood of all believers to which G-d called Israel from Sinai).
I would agree wholeheartedly. Yeshua supported this. If you would ask, which came first, your salvation or your works, the Christians would argue for centuries. The Jew would answer as Ya'acov answered, "Show me your faith, and I'll show you my works that you may see my faith." (Loosely paraphrased James 2:18) Or as Yeshua said, "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father which is in Heaven." (Matthew 5:16 KJV)
And this is where you and I fundamentally cease to agree.
I knew we would.
Human sacrifice is not an acceptable sacrifice, and no one else can atone for your sins (Ezekiel 18:20).
In addition, Yeshua was not without blemish. There is no way Yeshua could physically satisfy the physical requirements of the physical sacrifice called for in Torah. But it is my belief that everything G-d established in the physical is but an image of the reality which is in the spiritual realm. C.S. Lewis said that we are in the unreal shadowlands.
Unless Yeshua was who He claimed to be - that is very G-d in the flesh, I am a fool for believing that His death meant anything than the end of another Jewish Messianic movement. If Yeshua was who He clamed to be, then G-d finally fulfilled Himself what he asked Avraham to do, but then was unwilling to allow Avraham to do. If Yeshua was who He claimed to be, then His sacrifice could indeed suffice for all the spiritual results the Christians claim.
I am satisfied as to His claim. I know you are not, so I knew you would not be able to accept that part. But you did ask what I believed.
When you get back from your rest, you might ask yourself the following question on my behalf. "If ArGee believes that Yeshua is G-d in substance, then how would ArGee explain Yeshua calling out from the cross, 'My G-d, My G-d, why have you forsaken me?'"
Shabbat Shalom.