>>200
>Paul is meandering hard when he talks about Law, so I get where these misconceptions that Law is good and holy and great and whatnot comes from but again you keep to the letter and ignore what doesn't suit you (like love fulfilling the Law, the spirit of the Law not the letter). If Law is perfect does it have lordship over man only until death? Why it's important that we're being freed from it by our death in Christ as talked in Romans 7 you've quoted? Who's authority do you fall under when you fail to keep the Law which you cannot possibly keep in your human condition? It is a very difficult subject. It's hard to argue against the moral tenets of the Law, especially those in 10 commandments and it's not that morality is wrong but Law is a trap.
You keep forgetting that the reason why we're "freed" from it is because the Law doesn't save us, only Christ does. You cannot get saved by following the Law and trying to avoid sin by your own works, but only through Jesus.
Moreover, Levitical Law is again, made for a fallen people, it's not an eternal Law. This is what Jesus meant in Matthew 5:18, that not an inch will pass from the Law until heaven and earth pass.
>22 but I -- I say to you, that every one who is angry at his brother without cause, shall be in danger of the judgment, and whoever may say to his brother, Empty fellow! shall be in danger of the sanhedrim, and whoever may say, Rebel! shall be in danger of the gehenna of the fire.
Jesus isn't correcting the Law, he's correcting the bad, divisional interpretation of the Law that the Pharisees had. If you're correcting the theology of the Roman church, of course it doesn't mean that you're correcting Christianity as a whole.