1. People such as Shimmie Horn would likely agree. Introduction. Do forever means forever, then because we are told that they have been abolished? There is no contradiction perhaps in this conclusion that appeals to the New Testament denigrating as required in the old testament. This initial comment, can obviously be bland but many cristianoshonestamente have that question reserved in the shelf and there are no appropriate responses in the literature (whether we call it junk) conventional. Most of the time when someone asserts in his statements of biblical law is abolished, highlighting the grace, or not understood him or when he is questioned at depth is unable to defend the approach in detail, because the word abolish not correctly describes the status and effect of the Leysobre the believer.
Jesus said: Mat 5: 16 well alum your light before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify disannulled father which is in heaven.Mat 5: 17 think not that I have come to abolish the law olos prophets; I have not come to destroy, but tomeet.Mat 5: 18 because of verily I say unto you that until they pass elcielo and Earth, nor one jot nor one tittle will pass of law, until everything is accomplished. The assertion last, means (without Exegetical options) that the Act is valid until the end of its regulatory space, the last day or last day. The decrees of God are not inconsistent, but eternal but with a progressive completion. Then we will resume it is clarification. On the other hand Paul, the Apostle to the gentiles tells us law perished: 2 Cor 3: 7 and if the Ministry of death recorded with letrasen stones was with glory, so that the sons of Israelno could stare at the face of Moses to causade the glory of his face, which had perished, 2 Cor 3: 8 How could be rather with glory the spirit ministeriodel? Obviously when we weigh these two statements can lightly imagine a conflict of positions, but one of the rules of hermeneutics authenticates not to give full weight to a passage if at least two others do not yield conclusions on stored, as suggested by a passage is considerably unquestionable if at least there are two more than support it, otherwise a conflict (which is obvious to us are the conflicting) we must appeal to the general sense and linear development of the topic, so we avoid immerse us in towering postures deestereotipado dogmatism.