In the time of the Law of Moses, the Prophets spoke only in the context of that Law, knowing that depreciating it in any way would only cause people to rationalize it away and no longer fully observe it. As long as the Law was in effect, it was the job of the Prophets, and indeed the Messiah, to protect and preserve it.
This has nothing to do with the fact the Law, as a Covenant, would be fully broken in the time of Messiah, necessitating that a new Law come forth, centered on the Messiah himself, and not on Moses. This New Covenant did not condemn either Israel or the human race. Rather, if enacted it relied on grace and initiated a righteousness that was no longer condemned as flawed and temporary.
Stating that murder is equally anger, and adultery equally lust and covetousness, is not an enlargement of the Law. It was the Law from the start, applied in various contexts.
What was new about the New Covenant was the fact that Law no longer suppressed men and kept them under condemnation, falling short of Eternal LIfe. The New Covenant, by contrast, forgave sin and enabled men to continue to walk with God despite their sin and actually obtain the promise of Eternal Life.
This new way made the condemnatory rituals of the Law no longer necessary, to prevent human from entering eternal life. The promise of a resurrection made such rituals unnecessary and no longer applicable.
Why are you arguing this? It is true without an aspect of the OT Covenant of Law!
Jesus did not have to follow the Law of Moses at all! He was perfect and had no need to give offerings for his sin. He had no need to be given commandments to be righteous since he was God in the flesh--perfect righteousness before God.
So, we follow him, and not a Law that kept us out of heaven, or only in a temporary relationship with God. In following Jesus we find his grace, which surpasses the Law and gives us a righteousness that never ends.
I've already explained this. Jesus taught the Law while the era of Law was still in force. Every requirement of the Law was still being required by Messiah.
But Jesus was saying that he would fulfill it. He had not yet fulfilled it. He had come to fulfill it.
And when did he fulfill it? He fulfilled it on the cross, and in his resurrection. That's where an eternal covenant was made with God's People. The Law, by contrast, condemned Man and only provided a temporary means of relationship between God and Israel.
What Jesus was saying was that the testimony of the Law against human sin was eternal, up until the point where he would fulfill the Law. Until the end of this present universe, sinful man would have to die, as testified to by the Law. But Jesus would fulfill the Law not by just keeping the Law, but rather, by completing its purpose in a resurrection freely given to God's People.
You are repeating the same arguments. Jesus' fulfillment of the Law was not the fulfillment of all prophecies. Rather, it was the fulfillment of a specific set of prophecies that had to do with God's covenant with His People.
