It'so confusing because he says he'scome to fulfill it, but also says that one dot or stroke won'tbe deleted until heaven and earth pass.

Jesus says the Law stays in place until it’s fulfilled — and Catholics believe He fulfilled the Mosaic law in His death and resurrection. That’s why the ceremonial parts fall away while the moral law remains. St. Paul backs this up: if you try to keep the Mosaic law, you’re “obligated to keep the whole law” (Gal 5:3). Christ is the One who actually completed it, so Christians don’t go back to the old system.

Some people think Paul was promoting a completelydifferent religion, I know the word mystery is mentioned many times within the bible, and the Torah iyself has the written law, and the hidden oral law, and there are similaritieswith kabbalah. What about Jewish passover, is that the eucharist in Christianity? The Mitzot of Yod and Vav and the 2 Hehs of the feminine side of God in the wine, Was that fulfilled by Jesus being the Lamb? I've looked into Judaism (well most religions) there's a common thread about one becoming the vessel of God, whether, Christianity, Buddhism, Judaism, etc. Not sure why we celebrate Christmas either, that's more of a seasonal thing, unless Christ represents the sun? I love the stories of the Hebrew letters, again I see a whole link to Jesus as the word, the Aleph curse, the light, the First fruits, the Tav, etc

You’re pulling ideas from a lot of different systems — Torah, Kabbalah, solar symbolism, early Christianity — but they don’t all operate in the same framework. In Christianity the point is simple: Jesus fulfills the Passover as the Lamb, and the Eucharist is the new Passover meal. That’s why the early Church saw the Mosaic rituals as fulfilled rather than still binding. The later mystical letter symbolism is interesting, but it isn’t what the New Testament authors were working with. Christmas was created by the early Church because they felt they needed a celebration of the Incarnation. Christmas is not part of the NT and there is no listed date of His birth in the writings that survived the 3 centuries of Roman persecution. As for the modern theories about St. Paul; none of the apostles disputed him. He was writing most letters to specific Churches to address specific problems and the early Church fathers who selected the writings that would become the NT chose to include his letters in the NT. They were centuries closer to the actual events than any modern "scholar" who disputes St. Paul 2000 years later, IMHO.

What do you you think Paul meant by 1 cor 3:2 "I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it. And even now you are not yet ready,?"

I think he was telling them they were still spiritually immature. “Milk” = basic teaching; “solid food” = deeper instruction they weren’t ready for because of their divisions and behavior. Basically “I wanted to teach you more, but you’re still behaving like beginners.”

Cheers Dalcocono