Romans 4:10 and Matthew 5:17 Jesus not Sinless

Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

Notice the difference in tense. He does not say, "I fulfilled the Law and the prophets," but he essentially says that he feels this is his mission, much like the rest of us that try to do good on earth. "Have come" is different words than "Did," or merely "Have."

Keep in mind that several scholars say they think Jesus did not claim to be God, but that he did claim to be King. Jesus came at a time when the old definition of messiah still may have been used. It comes from the word that means king. Thus, Jesus many have only been claiming that he was king, when he claimed to be either the Lord or Messiah. The words malchut (king) and adonai (Lord) are both associated with David, even though most people know Adonai is another name for God everyone knows that David, when he was called adonai was not God. In the same way, both Jesus and David accepted worship. When David accepted worship, it was not a sign that he thought he was God.

Then, their is Son of God used for Jesus, but Judaism holds that we are all sons of God. Then, their is the use of, "I am," but it is in Greek, and is really no different from me saying, "I am Craig." I could take apart all the so called claims that Jesus said, and argue like many scholars that he never thought he was God. Also, it is not necessary to fulfill the Law in order to obtain the modern definition of Moshiach in Judaism. It is generally thought that Moshiach would not be without sin, as it is said in order to know the Law one must have transgressed it, and without transgression there is no way of preaching the Law. Similarly, Jews hold that Moshiach can't be God.

Jesus had to have transgressed the Law in order to have preached on it. How else would he be able to preach about it if he had no knowledge of it? The New Testament also says, "Jesus' learning greatly increased," this can only mean that Jesus was not born knowning everything, and was not omniscient.

Romans 10:4 (New International Version) Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes. My comment: Though Greek permits both definitions, the scholars say that this use of the word end, is as "Do the ends justify the means." Look up the philosopher Immanuel Kant and the term "Categorical imperative" and you will have the proper meaning of this verse. I will sum it up. Jews says it is best to follow the Law for the sake of following the Law, and not use it as a means to an end to accomplish something. In this sense, Paul is merely stating that Jesus righteously followed the Law. That he followed the Law because it was God's law, and not so that he could selfishly claim he was the messiah. This is interesting because he had no contact with him until after he died, so how he obtained this knowledge is questionable.